 So welcome everyone. I hope you've had a great day. Please feel free to move a little bit closer It feels like there's a lot of critical mass towards the back of the room We won't think it's rude if you get up and move down a little bit So welcome to our last panel Which we feel is one of the most important of our whole week Because we've been laying out all the challenges of a very rapidly changing and complex world for the last three days And now is our chance to figure out how do these this very important association of funders Think about the challenges in the world and how do their strategies and their strategies for impact in the world? Dovetail with the theories of change and strategies that we as program implementers have in the world And so I want if you haven't read it already I highly recommend the peace and security funding index that Rachel will be talking about Because it sets forth a fascinating taxonomy of funding strategies and then is a treasure trove of information About which grant which foundations are making which kinds of grants in what dollar amounts and you can click It's it's very very interactive. So please read it. I think it's fascinating and will be the basis for our discussion today So the way the panel will work is that Rachel Leforgia who's the program director for the peace and security funders group Will give a 15-minute overview of the peace and security funding index So you have a good sense of some of the major lessons emerging from that And then we have three funders of two funders and Alex Toma who is the executive director of the peace and security funders group And we'll talk more about some strategies in the grand-making world and how we think together About making an impact in these big social problems So the rest of our panelists we have Steve del Rosso who is the director of the international peace and security program at the Carnegie Corporation of New York Mary Stada who is an investments manager at Humanity United and Mary if you want to Continue over a little bit from the last panel and talk about systems work We can do that too and Alexandra Toma who is the executive director of the peace and security funders group So welcome all of you will leave plenty of time for a discussion with our full group, but Rachel's going to start us off Thanks, Melanie. Looks like we have no signal, but oh dear. Maybe at all Okay So thank you all for making it to the end of this conference I know four o'clock on the Thursday before Memorial Day weekend is a tough time to sell So I will try to keep you engaged and not bore you with this presentation I'm going to go over the index what it is some of our key findings the peace-building specific findings And how you can use it and then take a couple of clarifying questions before we go into the panel So what is the index? I see a lot of you have phones laptops. They have great internet here So feel free to go on the website. I'll show you the site shortly But the index is essentially a mapping of 288 foundations grants, so there's 2,000 grants in 2013 foundations gave $283 million in grants to peace and security work large writ large so not just peace building all types of work and so that's represented on the index and There is a website again. I invite you to go to it now. It's peace and security index org Obviously, we love short URLs And then also there's a report which you can download from from the website to be totally honest Sorry Alex the website is way more exciting than the report because you can click it But you can feel free to look at both So basically what we did was we want to undertake this mapping to understand who peace and security funders are what they do and What what what they're funding and the reason is why for us were a to understand For our members who are all foundations, you know who their partners are are their new partners We don't know about How can we get people to work together more and for for civil society organizations and geo's grantees? To people identify new partners to see how their work fits into this broader picture To find again new funders new partners and really just to shed more light and transparency onto this this sector So this is our framework that Melanie mentioned Based on a group of advisors who helped us come up with this framework as well as the grants themselves We found that peace and security funders do three things through their grant making they aim to prevent and mitigate conflict Resolve conflicts and build stable resilient peaceful societies And they do this throughout the spectrum of conflict and peace And so one of the top questions we get is you know, why is it a line? Why isn't it a circle? We talk often about how conflicts are cyclical And so that was actually a strategic communications decision Part of the reason why how we want to use this index is to bring new funders to the table to bring more Money to the pot. And so when we're trying to sell this work to people, you know We don't want to sell them a circle of doom. We want to send them a message of hope. So we have kind of this hopeful rainbow That that hopefully illustrates, you know, the goal that you can make progress in this field that you can put money into things You can support great work and have really great important outcomes. So again, we hope that we will attract more funding to this field So the the website again is laid out and there's different issue areas that you can look at peace building as one of them And you can kind of see the the pool of funding This is an example for those of you who don't have internet access right now of what you'll see on the website This is funding for resolution period of conflict and you'll see that there's peace building peace negotiations and DDR as a subset of that so you can see kind of the funding breakdown on the website You can also see the funding breakdown geographically and it cross-sex the data so you can look at the data in different ways and and look at really countless options of how the funding is divided You could spend days on the site if you really wanted to Key findings so we had five key findings overall So let me give you those first and then kind of situate the peace building findings within that first Peace and security funding is a small piece of the pie I've heard this countless times over the past couple days whether it's government funding or Civil Society organizations talking about how the pie is so small for this field in this space and that's true within the foundation world So peace and security funding makes up less than 1% of total foundation giving So we're talking about a small pool within the overall pie Despite that the funding is having really outsized impact and on the website you'll find stories of some updates of progress and some of the grants the work that many of You are doing in fact and what we wanted to come through on the site is really to convey a message that it's not about money It's not about dollars and grants and numbers It's really at the end of the day about people and and it's it's not just numbers It's not numeric there's stories behind all of these grants all of this funding And so you'll find some of the spotlight stories on the website and that's something we really want to bring out So there is impact happening with really small amounts of money again, which I'm sure most of you know Diversity the funding field is really diverse both in terms of issues funded and in terms of types of funders So it's not like every foundation in this field is making huge grants of two hundred thousand dollars a year We have foundations who are making you know a thousand dollar grants all the way through the one point or two point Whatever million dollar grants, so there's a really wide range and that's positive because if you're a small organization It means you have access to small grants that you can you can spend and if you're a large organization You also have access to larger grants There's also diversity in areas of focus again on the website You'll see there's I think 30 different areas that you can track how much funding goes to so there's a wide range of areas of interest Funders support a wide range of strategies You'll notice that general support made up 20% of the grants And so that's something that we as the peace and security funders group are going to be working with our members to hopefully improve Knowing that again over the past few days We've heard how important general operating support grants are and that's something we're going to work with our members to hopefully increase in the future But you can see the other strategies again on the website prevention Grant money for conflict prevention and also atrocities prevention is a really small really underrepresented area And again, this was referenced yesterday during yesterday's keynote and the challenges of funding and getting funding for prevention work And so it made up only 6% of overall funding Which was something that I don't know that we were surprised by but we thought was important to highlight given You know a lot of the attention recently that's been coming to atrocity prevention and and response And finally Just a reminder. This is a mapping of grants and grants data. So it's not a mapping of the field itself It's a mapping of how foundations are making grants within this field And so one of our findings is that we really need to improve the data set and the information We get from foundations so that we can better map the funding and so here's two examples of Grants that we have in our set both are for general support But as you can see the level of description is very different And what that means for us is when we get a grant like the first one that just says for general support We have no way of knowing if it's a peace-building grant if it's a prevention grant if it's a reconciliation grant We don't know and so one of the things that we're doing on our end is working with our funders and other and other foundations to improve the quality of Data submission so that we can have a better sense of what they're actually funding peace-building funding so 2013 and this is all again based on 2013 data the reason for that is a this is the first year of the project And so that's the data we had to work with We're working on updating it and making it more current it will always there's always going to be a year lag time We'll always be looking at the previous year simply because of the way foundations report data and the time it takes to process the data So we are looking at 2013 9.8 million in grant-making went to peace-building in that year there was a hundred and thirty one grants and Represented three point five percent of total funding again It's a very small amount within a small pie. So we're talking like you know the weight watchers piece of pie Not you're like Thanksgiving Thanksgiving pie. Yeah So and it's 38 foundations did make those grants So there are a considerable number of fund funders who are funding peace-building work also We know that there may be other peace-building funders out there who aren't represented on this yet And so if you know of any funders, and I'm going to show you the list next shortly I'll show you the list But if you see someone that's not represented, please come find me because I would love to reach out to them to ensure Their data is in our index So peace-building keywords This is the words that we used to identify peace-building grants And this is gets into more of the technical database side of things which is really fun I can tell you But basically these are the key words we used so for grant grant T or grant description had any of these words It pulled into the peace-building side of grants now. I'm sure some of you are out there like well, what about mediation? What about Translation so that was a really big challenge for us is how do you define peace-building work? Everyone defines it differently and what words are people using it and not using to describe their work And so that again was another challenge in this was trying to figure out how we pull in Relevant grants and exclude the ones that aren't really peace-building So we wound up with all of these words Through again infrared feedback from our advisors and also by you looking at the grants themselves and doing some research On the grantees and the work they were doing so it was a pretty comprehensive process But again if anyone sees a word and you're like well, I don't know if peace-building should have a hyphen or not I'm happy to discuss that with you after And here are just three sample grants. I wanted to show you so there are sample grants found throughout the website but these are three peace-building specific ones with all of the variations in spelling and I wanted to show you because it really shows the breath Of the grants that are encompassed by peace-building. So you have an alliance for peace-building grant on peace-building evaluation Which is one type of grant you also have a grant to a city council Which is a definitely a non-traditional recipient on their peace-building work And then a grant to a local work for peacemaking efforts again on a totally different lens So this just really represents the diversity within the field of peace-building itself the diversity in funding Interests so you have funders who are really interested in a wide range of geographic context issues and approaches And then also I didn't put the size on but the the sizes of the grants also vary You have really small grants as I saw before it was like a two thousand dollar grant And then you have really large grants as well. So there is a lot of diversity within the funding field We had two main challenges to tracking peace-building grant making First is terminology which I spoke a little bit about but I'll give you an example of a grant that we have here where it's kind of like Is it peace-building? Is it not peace-building? So we have this grant that just says for building a culture of peace So how many of you would consider that peace-building culture of peace? How many would not consider a peace-building? All right. Thank you. Yeah, so yeah So we don't know the point is we don't know and we can't make that judgment call because again We're working in a database So I can't tell the computer okay anything that says culture of peace is Peace-building because there might be some grants who use that terminology that are not peace-building at all that are something different So that again was one of the challenges that we had with with tracking peace-building funding We also all funders don't talk about their work as peace-building So people will say we're supporting civil society work on the ground locally And so we don't know it's peace-building But you know it comes out of a peace-building program, but we don't have the information so we can't code it as such So we're hoping that the funding for peace-building is actually a little bit higher And that we'll see the change next year once we have more comprehensive grant data the second problem again was just general support grants which are terrific for Organizations but terrible for building a grant database So I guess we're kind of lucky that 80% were not general support but We will advocate for more that despite the challenges it poses to our work And then the 2013 peace-building funders, so get your phones out quickly, you know It was hard to fit them on one slide So so these are all the different groups that funded peace-building work And some of them actually were a little bit of a surprise Because we had never encountered them before and so we're working to do outreach To pull them into our group to help them connect again to other funders And then also to Encourage them to give more money So so these are again some of these may or may not be a surprise to you But if there's anyone who you're like oh my gosh, you know my dad funds peace-building and he's not on there And then that's important. This is only a mapping of foundations And so there are Operating foundations are not included and there are some operating foundations doing incredible important work who are not represented And then also individuals there's so many individual philanthropists that are PSFG members who are doing work And they're not represented on this either yet, but we are working on that for the future So again, this is just foundations and finally using the index So you're probably like okay, we have this big website Rachel You spent a year of your life, you know in a coffee place like you know Drudging away at three spreadsheets like what am I gonna do with this? So here's what you can do with it if you're a civil society organization and you can scope out new funders We hope you use it for that. We hope you go on there, you know find foundations stock people get in touch with them Share your work with them Situate your work within the funding landscape use it to make the case You know only this percent is used for peace-building and with this small grant we can do this or with this large grant We can do this and use it to back up your work and to support it And then make the case for more funding for why we need more funding because we do and And then policy makers find foundation partners Foundations are open and interested in working with with policymakers and government donors And so PSFG is trying to help build bridges between between different groups to try to leverage funding and make the funding go further and then learn about peace and security issues If you're not familiar with them and then finally for funders if you are a funder find new funding partners We hope that you'll you know see one of those foundations up there and reach out to them and talk about your work Help understand help your board understand where your funding fits in So if you're making the case to a board on why they should maintain or increase a peace-building Portfolio you can use this to make that case and remember, you know, we're having the Weight Watchers pie and Finally to identify funding gaps So the cool thing about looking retroactively at 2013 is you can think about some of the things that were happening in 2013 Some of the things that are happening now in peace and security and say oh did we make a mistake and not fund the right things? So, you know for example in 2013 there was not a whole lot of funding private funding going to Syria So as a community funding community we can reflect on that and hopefully learn from from some of the things that we did or didn't find And finally fill the gaps. So if there is a funding gap see what your foundation or friends can do to fill it So that's my 15 minutes of fame So now I'll take any Clarifying questions. So nothing too specific, but if there's something that was not clear about the index the data or anything I'm happy to answer your questions If anyone has any So the data was pulled from the Foundation Center's database So the Foundation Center collects data from foundations not just in the US all over the world Although primarily they are from the US and they also pull data from 990s. So if foundations don't Like happily submit their data, they just go and search through 990s and then pull some data Which isn't that great, but they still have it. So that's where it comes from it is from the Foundation Center And and largely it is self-submitted foundations do turn over their information, which is terrific the 3.5 is A piece of The overall pie So it is a part of that 283 million It's a percentage of that So it's like part of it. That's that's what it's in relationship to Two billion so so human funding for human rights work is that around two billion so it's considerably higher Those lucky people human rights Yeah So I wonder if I could ask you Alex and those of you who are at the peace and security funders group meeting since you just had your annual conference What was the reaction from your community and it might be helpful also to tell tell us who's in your community So we have a sense of what kinds of foundations are part of it. Sure. Yeah, so We just had our annual meeting a few weeks ago Rachel has had a chance to practice this We the reaction was I mean, maybe you could speak to that more than I can but the reaction was a Reflective I mean, I think we had a really great annual meeting We explored some of the gaps and some of what the data told us and there are several PSFP members here So, you know, I'm happy to turn it over to them. I don't want to speak on their behalf But who they are is we are up to 65 members They are all sorts of funders and philanthropists as Rachel mentioned We have public private operating foundations family foundations as well as individual philanthropists that are part of the PSFG network and we seem to be growing almost I wouldn't say weekly but Definitely monthly even the past year we've got 10 new members that have joined the peace and security funders group because they want to Collaborate with their peers to enhance the effectiveness of philanthropy in this field Okay, thank you. Are there other funders with Mary or any or Steve? Would you like to talk about your reactions when you first saw this report? I'm completely agree with Alex at the meeting that we had a few weeks ago in Portland It was I think a moment of being able to look specifically for me at the very limited funding available for prevention And I think you know, there's a lot to unpack behind that and why I mean some of the very logistical reasons that Rachel outlined, but I think there are also some broader programmatic reasons that account for that real Small amount that ultimately goes to prevention, which is an area that humanity United is really But exploring very deeply the past few years and is hoping to increase our funding and our support in that area Thank you. Well, I wasn't at the the last conference PSFG conference But I was present at the creation when PSFG was established and from the very beginning We've been looking for a database of what the field as we define has been doing so I I commend our colleagues Do I hear my voice reverberating? It's my tie Okay, anyway So I I think that the I commend PSFG I think the report As Rachel has described there was some practical and methodological challenges And if you read the end of the report it says something about how You're going to learn from this and there are other more nuanced approaches as you go forward. So again And this gives you an amazing baseline This is to be to clarify you do this yearly so you'll be able to update this So we are we're going to improve it. It's an iterative Database, I don't know. Yeah It was on the tie, but I think you put it on my tie So we're gonna do this annually and Yeah, and it's as Rachel said where it's it there are challenges But we hope that it's you know more resource than it is, you know a challenge to get this data And just from a thumbnail kind of sketch because we have a luxury of being peace building a nice kind of broad fuzzy umbrella To what extent did you see the ratios between security and peace and was it fine-grained enough to really capture that? Yeah, I think the answer to that is that Most funders don't speak about their work so much in terms of security and the grants aren't labeled as such so I think they're generally it wasn't stronger security or peace. It was really just totally Diffuse in terms of the different issues. So you'd see like nuclear disarmament or you see some diplomacy, but Really it was more issue-based than peace versus security Well, there are two sets of questions I'd like to ask you to get us started and then we can open it up to the rest of the group But I'm very interested in bridge building You know, how do we build bridges between? Traditional peace-building work and then organizations that are doing peace-building work in other sectors so where you're able to capture democracy groups or governance groups or Human rights or climate and to what extent is that reflected in this index and even if it's not How are you kind of seeing this play out in your own grant making? sure, um, I think that's a it's a really tough question because Even though while I think all these different sectors whether it's human rights or governance or humanitarian or peace-building We're all working towards, you know a peaceful and inclusive society ideally and yet we're still very siloed in our individual work And I think all too often our individual efforts aren't actually adding up to some of these broader goals that we all have in mind I think forums like the alliance for peace-building are actually a wonderful, you know entry point for having some of these conversations So is PSFG And I think individual private donors also have a role to play in terms of incentivizing different sectors to be collaborating and to be brainstorming Even within sectors, I mean all too often, you know policy makers are very disconnected from what academic academia is doing I think that's also a role where private Philanthropy can play a role in bringing together these various different actors to be sharing research and recommendations And to really be working together towards this ultimate goal that we all are are trying to see That's a perfect segue Steve. Didn't you just get back from Denver looking at bridging that gap? Yes, indeed I did A focus at the Carnegie Corporation and the international peace and security program that We'd like to think transcends all our work in bridging the academic research and policy gap Certainly the work in peace-building Is relevant to that on the bridge issue? Unfortunately, as you know, I wasn't here the first two days of the conference But in looking at the agenda it seems to me that there are a lot of bridges that have been built and are being built and I'm not really sure what traditional peace-building means anymore And when I looked at the at the survey it was pretty evident that we have everything from nuclear security to gender issues and As was suggested it raises a question what was left out and not only somebody's father who has worked on peace-building It wasn't recorded but it there are there are lots of activities that don't have that the p-word in it that obviously Some what could make a plausible argument under a loose constructionist definition of peace-building that are relevant for example at Carnegie we've had a long-standing program in Reforming higher education in a subset of sub sub sub-saharan African countries So he said what's that to do with peace-building? Well, if that is contributing to the health of the university which is contributing to health and well-being in society Then that could also be included exactly Well one thing that I've noticed and it was part of the planning of this conference for this year is I have not in at least three years had the conversation of is peace-building a field Because that was the conversation for so long. Are we a field or are we just But I think people are also comfortable with the fact that this is a very integrative field And so that there is some border with these other fields that we can help we can encompass The World Bank just last year we were at their FCB conference. So the World Bank just last year You know rejiggered their strategic Goals and overlaid five one of which is fragile conflict and violent states the World Bank It's a squarely development And another one. I think it's gender Gender-based issues and so I think there's a there's sort of this Understanding that it's you know, it isn't okay. Here's peace-building. Okay. Here's you know development here No, I don't think we need to water it down. I don't know that we should be you know merging with the environmental grant makers association But I think that there are some there's a Venn diagram where they all kind of We can help each other out across Sectors and learn I think the SDG process also brought this you know in a very central way where we now actually do have a Goal focused around peaceful and inclusive societies and governance and it was in a highly political Process that led to that. I mean, I know there was an intense amount of negotiating and earlier on in the process A lot of people saying this shouldn't be part of a development agenda And that it was you know quite heated at moments But ultimately I think it speaks volumes to the fact that at that big of a forum you actually have that as a central part of an entire development platform There's a kind of deja vu all over again sense to this for me I started in philanthropy at the end of the Cold War and in those days a lot of us were talking about how the Emergent problems in the world were inherently interdisciplinary and therefore we needed to have interdisciplinary solutions and one could argue 25 years later that's even more the case and you know and I think in in terms of peacebuilding the fact that It is so expansive and integrative is To use a cliche both a challenge and an opportunity. It's an opportunity because it's inclusive and it can reach out But it's challenging particularly For some funders because it's difficult to get your your arms around Well, I wonder you we have a good sense I think within our community of what the advocacy looked like around goal 16 and as we came up to the World Humanitarian Summit Nancy told us this morning that peace and comfort prevention were very much in the center of those discussions What did the philanthropy discussions look like during that advocacy period were you involved with advocacy? Were you thinking about your own programs reading the tea leaves about how some of these new? Orientation to be shaping up Yeah, absolutely. I mean Over the past couple of years. We've been developing a new initiative at humanity United Which is completely focused around the prevention of deadly violence and responding to the risk of violence and this was while the SDG process was being negotiated and I Mean, I think it really did speak to a desire particularly post 2013 with the crisis in South Sudan and Central African Republic In which we really were caught off-guard and you know did not have the tools or resources to respond Early and to anticipate those crises. And so with the SDG process Happening simultaneously. I think what it really did was animate and deepen our commitment to be working in this prevention field squarely As well as I think a lot of excitement that we're not alone in this and that there's a huge amount of energy and a burgeoning community That we also want to be better linked to and a Carnegie was that kind of on the radar were you kind of defining problems a little differently? well Let me put it this way in If you're directing a program on international peace and security and you're looking at the condition of the world as it is that means either someone like me is either Needed more than ever or needs to find different employment so but the challenge is that A lot of what we're doing. We're already was already relevant to the to the new goals But you know our view we've tried over the years as best as the specifics of the agenda has changed to not succumb to the kind of institutional ADHD that that can lead us astray so under certain rubrics whether it's nuclear security or Relations with China and Russia a lot of these subset issues that were reflected in the new goals We're addressing but not We've kept our eye on on these for a long time and how they've evolved And just to add that the council on foundation is one of our sister Organizations very very broad, but they're they have a track right now that they're looking at the SDGs and how How funders can play a role they're starting to facilitate some conversations and The European funders are actually pretty jazzed up about the F's of the SDGs So I know the European Foundation Center is particularly looking at how funders relate to the SDGs So I wonder if we could talk for just a minute about some of the gaps that we saw in the index One that was mentioned already was prevention and I had just a couple of thoughts about that The first was in our fragility panel this morning Sarah Cliff left us with a challenge of how do we have a better typology of violence prevention Comfort prevention CVE and atrocities prevention And then I also had a conversation with Aaron at lunch this week when I asked him brother Bluntly Well, what did he think about the fact that prevention was only 6% of this total and Aaron, I don't know if you'd like to give me your answer, which I thought was actually very comforting Aaron works the Carnegie Corporation in New York Sorry about that My answer to the question on conflict prevention was that I think there are a lot of It depends on how you code Some of these programs that different foundations are working on And then there's a lot of things that go into conflict prevention Conflict doesn't come out of one thing. It's more bulbous than that It comes from society, which anybody who's in the systems thinking earlier Understands is quite complex a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil, you know so kind of my Summary of that comment would be that I think there's a lot of things that go into conflict prevention that wouldn't necessarily be quoted Specifically as conflict prevention. And so if we if we were to change to the way we coded it We perhaps would get a larger number that we would say is focused on conflict prevention But I under also understand why you would code it in certain ways So So I was actually talking to CSO this morning about that very thing so Conflict stabilization office of the State Department, so Basically the the conflict prevention piece We actually did it as a strategy as well at prevention efforts overall And that also was only 6% and it's a little bit broader and encapsulates a little bit more Includes track to diplomacy includes work on mass atrocities and genocide which actually is not so much Preventive that we're seeing in the grants. It's actually more reactive So it's working with survivors of atrocities working with prosecutions, which again There are those that make the argument that that is part of prevention I'm so you know It's a circle and where does it stop and where does it end and where do you where do you start and finish it? And so it is pretty broad we did end up with a pretty broad Definition of what prevents what constitutes prevention efforts and even within that broad definition. It still is a pretty low number and Definitely there are some issues within the field itself on defining what is prevention and what isn't but I think that This what's represented in the index definitely isn't as conservative as it could be so the number in fact is probably a little bit higher than Then what it actually is if you kind of remove some of the things that some may not consider prevention like for example prosecuting perpetrators 20 years later So that because those were a bunch of the grants. I think only four grants in 2013 went specifically to early warning systems Specifically so it is a very very small small piece on that early warning just some of us who are funding early warning 20 years ago The argument then was and I think now is still the same that we know enough about early warning It's what to do when we have the early warning. So, you know, maybe that Prevention qua prevention as defined 20 years as as Aaron and others have described has evolved so Yeah, I think also the response language is a little bit different as well So we didn't see like early we used early response as a keyword as well And it didn't yield a lot of because most people don't talk about their program as all their early response, right? You talk about no election monitoring or you know access to justice So we did put in words like that to pull in those grants because again our first our first round of things We had you know early warning early response and it was zero We said there's gotta be more than zero and there was we just had to dig a little deeper So I think I mean I think just what this is what this Conversation just now the past couple of minutes is illustrating is that it's it's very complex. It's Tough as you all know all too well And it you know one of our challenges was to make something that is so 3d so tough so evolving and dynamic into Something that that those not in this room those that we need to convince to fund more do more get more active That they can feel like they're part of it. They get it. They're like, oh, okay I got it. This is what peace and security. This is what peace building is. This is how I can plug in and so You know, I think we did the best that we could I'm not trying to be defensive about it but it's gonna be hard as you all know and it's You know, I think we're trying to Part of what we're trying to do is to make it so that make it like yeah 3d thing into a 2d thing So that it's a little bit more accessible to folks and I don't know I mean maybe in a few years it'll look a little bit differently and we'll have different keywords And that's I we really do want you to I mean we do say this. We're not just saying it We really do want your input and your help And we are gonna be forming another advisory committee. Hopefully, right? Yeah for this year so Yeah, what form of feedback would be most helpful the email is there a place to comment on the website E-mailing my email address is on the website So if you go to the think frequently ask questions about us You can find it there, and I would love to get emails from people Honestly I know many people have questions I wonder if I could ask each of the four of you a question, which is for next year's index What would make you most happy to see included or changed in next year's index? I know Rachel So for me we had our little spectrum of conflict and right now that's how the the grants are divided So I'm hoping we're gonna change that so that we're looking more in-depth at the issues themselves So next year, hopefully you'll be able to look at peace building see the funders see more information about the grants themselves See where those funders are working. So just more comprehensive and better resource for people in the field and also foundations as well Thank you. I Think that when you get the comments from various foundations and Foundation offices are not usually shy about expressing their opinion whenever their work is displayed in a report that next year's will will be even more nuanced in terms of the Categories the coding and that will make some foundations even happier. I Definitely agree with Steve's point And I think it would also be wonderful to see how we can actually use the index over the course the coming year to be Generating greater resources for some of these very under-resourced gaps. We've already discussed So would part of that perhaps be working with our community Could we be doing op-eds or other kinds of social media or outreach? So there's kind of this communication between the funding community and the grantee community about where priorities could be Yes, I do Yes, please use this as the basis of I mean Rachel said it how you can use it you know of op-eds of drawing more attention to the field Helping us make it better. One thing that I etc. etc. and we have plenty of ideas So do do get in touch one thing that I would add that I think could make it better is And we're trying and you kind of got a previous as the annual meeting is that it does not include operating foundations It does not include individuals. This does not include bilateral or multilateral Aid which we know is a lot So we're trying to work with our partners the Foundation Center to see if there's a way in which we can integrate that data and again Make it a more comprehensive picture add it I'm sense empathetic with the challenge and it seems to me the tension between defining the field Whatever we different we'll recall it too low too broadly and too narrowly But many of us have been involved in the in the debate over what it is I think we have to move beyond the semantic argument, but By the same token I wonder I was I've I've used this line in many contexts and it occurred to me in peace building The Moliere character who discovered he'd been speaking pros all his life There are many peace builders who might be surprised that they're doing peace building But that's okay, but it does also Raise this the specter of deluding the object of analysis, so I don't have a brilliant idea on how to How to balance that but I think that that's a living challenge with this kind of survey when you say deluding Do you mean it's not really peace building or do you mean in the sense that you know What we really should be looking at is capturing those stray electrons who actually are doing peace building and get them into the orbit Well again, it's it's sadly it gets down to a semantic argument with a Norwegian NGO on whose board I served two weeks ago decided to drop the term peace building from their title and and the argument was that it's kind of passé and And too narrow and I was American on the board and I said and by the way you'll be you in particular Melanie would be intrigued to know that the the new term that came up with this conflict resolution, so So I very diplomatically is the only gringo in the group Try to explain that you know there had been a discussion about this a couple decades ago And in fact peace building is is rather expensive and everything you're trying to do so at the end of the day I shut up and and I Figured out that what they were going to do was more important than what they called it So, you know if we look at it if we can somehow delimit this universe So it isn't everything and nothing at the same time. I think we'll be okay. So interesting. So we're not changing their programming It was just the way of being described Okay And why don't we cluster a few at a time we have mics and Going around John Rudy lines for peace building and Elizabeth Town College We've heard this week The Institute of economics in peace. I believe says violence costs 14 trillion for the globe every year if we could have like Point Half a percent of that we'd have a pie so big we'd be obscenely obese Can we connect are you connecting the social impact bonds and the social enterprise? in that database and with that just You know if those kinds of things come online as they come online. How is that going to? Change the nature of what this panel's discussion Thank you. That's cluster a couple questions Beatrice Yeah, Jackie Wilson very interesting presentation. My question is about the other if I'm understanding the numbers correctly nine percent of the funding so what is the other ninety percent going toward are there big categories? they haven't been on the website and Is the Reason for the gap in peace building funding because of challenges with monitoring evaluation and Delivering or being able to demonstrate impact or is it some other reason? That kind of builds on what this gentleman was asking Thank you Hi Beatrice, my question and it doesn't have to do with eliminating the field or the definition but the remarks Steve you made about The agenda the past two days and and the type of issues and that type of disciplines were brought in Neuroscience, but there are all those two one of the challenges a big challenge is is that and and as You know because we have known each other for a long time Among many people here. I like to take risk and I think the way we He said yes The way we and it doesn't mean that we we found when when we do that But we try to push the envelope and try to understand better try to find ways to do our job better The problem is how do we finance? When we bring in other disciplines when we do things that are unusual that countless of projects Many people here could talk about the project I've tried to do that were on the age and You cannot find it's very difficult to find funding in the usual suspect in your usual donors Very difficult for instance the terms of Neuroscience in the Neuroscience community. They have trouble finding Money to work on that. So how do we? How we do resolve that and sometimes we are lucky to have people like your SIP put in the first Taking the first risk, but you still have to raise more money if you want to do the work So how can we? How do we do that and and we have people like in our helping to push the envelope? But I think on a number of topic we need to find a way to Tap into new resources in order to take those risks to risk to fail To push the envelope of what we are doing and bring all the disciplines and all the people in our in our field Why don't we take these three because they're such substantive questions the first was on The mark of just the percentage of the 14 trillion, but are we also looking at some of the social impact bonds social enterprise kinds of funding? From Jackie, where is the other 90% going and is M&E still a barrier for our field for funding? And then the question around how do you fund risk? Do you want to start Alex and take any or all? Yeah, I I'll just take the the one of them and I think Rachel has you know more of the data She can answer that a bit but at the PSFG annual meeting a few weeks ago This is a panel that we specifically had was on different types of investments and different types of social impact bonds and Divesting investing things like that. I mean, it's not exactly what you're talking about Nor what the first gentleman asked about specifically, but I think there are conversations that are Starting or continuing to happen. I haven't I've only been in the field 10 years now So perhaps they you know, maybe this is deja vu again, but But there are New ways of thinking I think too to that point that maybe to answer a little bit your question There's a surge in Silicon Valley Philanthropists who do have experience and if you're not failing 80% of the time then you're doing something wrong And I think that thinking is coming online now and you're starting to see some new foundations popping up who have much higher risk tolerance and there's lots of reasons why You know different types of risk talents is which my colleagues can talk about if they want, but I think it's It's a it's not an easy answer, but I think there are some new new players on the scene I mean, I think this point about Failure is a really really important one and think our community as a whole needs to get much better about talking about failure And about being honest about it because and donors absolutely I think have a really important role in encouraging more open and honest feedback about failure Because I understand that if you know you're talking to a donor about a project or an initiative that didn't turn out the way You thought it would that can make you quite nervous about that perhaps jeopardizing future funding And I think that's you know a concern. That's you know not an irrational one on the part of grantees And you know at HU we talk about a lot about adopting a a fail-smart approach And by that we mean you know if we are on this you know in the Silicon Valley more risky side of the philanthropy space You know if we're saying that we want to take risks and we want to be funding on the cutting edge We need to be comfortable with the fact that some of the things we fund will not succeed What's important though is understanding why it didn't succeed and then how can that learning then inform future? Partnerships as well as then how can we be pushing that learning out to other donors and other actors in this space? My boss the inevitable right tongue Gregorian Has written and talked about what he calls the illuminating failure and at Carnegie we we understand the Philosophy behind that but it's difficult in practice if I had enough illuminating failures I probably wouldn't be be here today But let me say a couple of words about the new philanthropists and the old dinosaur philanthropists because as As you well know after the the financial crisis there was this I Was going to say Obsession with and I will you say obsession with a strategic philanthropy and what that's what's happened in a number of Philanthropies is that our guidelines have become More narrow that's been the practical effect. So trying to be Interdisciplinary trying to be creative Recognizing as we did 25 years ago that these are inherently interdisciplinary problems When the actual guidelines are written in very narrow way Suggests great creativity Needed on both the part of the grant writer and the grant officer. That's all philanthropy a new philanthropy I think there is a great opportunity however, and I claim no real understanding of That sector of philanthropy, but it seems to me that the real challenges is explaining that Promoting positive social change is a long-term Undertaking as we heard this morning in the world development report in 2011 generational 20 years and My sense is from the handful of new philanthropists. I've met that there is Perhaps even more impatience to see the fruits of their investments as they did in the private sector So the discussion Robert Sigliano's The way he termed it you need to have a north star and a near star I think the near star is more Easily addressed in the new philanthropic world the north star, which is really important one Investing individuals and institutions over the long haul will be the greater challenge But I speak from a great Foundation of ignorance on that subject and John Paul Edirach and his remarks this week talked about decades thinking So you're not seeing a trend and foundations towards that kind of 10 year 15 year support No I do think you see long-term commitment to the same goals and ideas It's not like foundations are flipping every three to five years. They do have 20 30 year strategies The grant cycles may just be short within those 20 or 30 year strategies Issue areas that because I'm not sure what Strategies probably maybe some five to ten years depending. I think it's difficult to have a 20 year strategy in any context But just in regards to the other 99% so we are part of the 1% So That actually is you can find some information on the foundation center website But it's really in a variety of areas not every sector has done a mapping So it's not really a beautiful pie that you can just look at and say okay education is 75% health care Is 20% or whatnot So there is some information on the website, but we are definitely a very small piece of the pie in terms of including Social impact bonds and alternative forms of funding in the index. It is a challenge the foundation center Unfortunately is a little bit bound by their name. They do work with foundation data. And so even operating foundations It's difficult. They support who essentially fund their own work It's difficult to quantify sometimes the amount of money that is being poured into certain areas and Kind of match the data with grants data So we are working with them on it and it's a long-term endeavor to get them to include Different types of support and funding and also just to echo Alex the individual donors And next-gen funders as well are a huge opportunity And so I hope that you don't see this is okay There's only 38 funders What are we going to do now because there are so many new funders entering the scene and looking for things to fund and who have enormous amounts of money and so we just need to tap into them and convince them to get on our boat and join our team so We have time I think for two more really quick questions and then maybe an answer and a wrap-up before we before we end our day So yes Thank you so much. Hello. Can you hear me? Joanne lotter young Kelly with Karuna Center for peace building. I live and work in Myanmar So very challenging context and a lot a lot of discussions in the last year about funding and funders Those more cynical than I who talk about the peace building industrial complex and a lot of discussions around conflict sensitivity and Peace Nexus did a report recently looking at South Sudan and Myanmar and donors and conflict sensitivity They found that conflict sensitivity tends to get pushed down the chain to the implementers And by the time you have an accepted proposal and a contract on a log frame You're really caught between a rock and a hard spot to implement if conflict sensitivity wasn't part of the Country strategy of the donor in the first place. So I'm curious to know your thoughts on that if any of your organizations If that's being discussed if you've ever used a conflict sensitivity advisor and or just your thoughts about Having that more at the strategic level then sort of push down the chain to the implementation level. Thank you Thank you Hello, Bob Rie. Whoo with some peace direction USA for Rachel could you comment on the amount of funding in for beneficiaries are United States and Also, then to broaden to the other funders What's kind of the discussion in your space around? the absence of peace in the United States and the role of philanthropy in Particularly your types in US domestic peace building We like to start Rachel then we'll go down sure, so There's there's actually when we develop this we realize there's actually two questions, right? It's recipients who are in the United States and working on issues within the United States because we do have a lot of organizations that are doing US policy advocacy versus Organizations based in the US that are doing work abroad and so we tried to separate that out And you'll see in the report. There's a little discussion on that and we did find that It's not an 80-20. It's it's less than that. So most organizations are I think it's just above 50% I can't remember the exact numbers But are not it's not all US based organizations. There are a lot of Is a lot of funding going to other countries and other contexts? You can see it on the website peace building specifically in this iteration You cannot see the breakdown of where the funding is going by region geographically, but you can see within the Resolving space kind of how that funding is broken down, but it's really clear on the website So I really encourage you to look on that website. It's beautifully represented On the conflict sensitivity question in recent years, we haven't supported direct on the ground peace building we have supported a lot of research That elicits and applies local knowledge, which is our mantra particularly in Africa And almost as a matter of course and by the way just to mention we know that Local voices and getting local insights has been around for a long time. We don't romanticize the local We don't treat it as a monolith, but Conflict sensitivity issues inevitably come up when people are writing who are living in conflict affected regions So it's been a sort of a knock-on effect of some of the work we've supported I mean to the complex sensitivity point I'll use the example of our work in Burundi over the past year where humanity United has worked with a number of groups on the ground as well as some international advocacy as well and With our grant making in Burundi. We intentionally used or gave our grantees Maximum flexibility to adapt their programs particularly over the past year as the crisis has really unfolded Some of the the projects and ideas that we had over a year ago by the end of the grant cycle were pretty much irrelevant And so the way that we did that was you know We set up monthly phone calls with our grantees that we did in lieu of them filling out a log frame and use those as really Real-time learning opportunities and those conversations definitely fed into our subsequent grant making But also made sure that we were up to speed on how things were changing on the ground and how our partners were adapting accordingly Yeah, and I'll I mean my sort of last message as we're running short on time is Is that you know The peace and security funders group exists because funders want to collaborate with one another and with partners So Mellie and I have a very regular check-in So we do plug in we're trying to not just you know be over here and every funder sort of doing their own thing We work regularly with us IP in fact We have the risk and is is a very close Partner of the PSFG and even within PSFG I mean there are there are two working groups that come to mind the locally led peace building working group Where funders are really trying to hear from those on the ground and and share lessons And then there's the conflict and atrocities prevention working group where again There are bridges amongst the funders themselves But then also between funders and the practitioners who are on the ground So I think I mean what my sort of takeaway my takeaway message for you all is that funders aren't just sitting in their offices They like oh, yeah, not that not that people are saying that that's what they're doing, but it's what they're Steve's never in his office. He's always on the road as is Mary But I think that there's really a What was what was someone who was with us for our annual meeting who is not a funder But was there in the capacity representing a funder said that you know, it's really she pulled me aside so this it's really heartening that you're having these really tough conversations and that you do it with great intention and with great humility and With really just open minds and open hearts and she's like I didn't know that this happened and it does every day And this is why Rachel and I are employed And so, you know, we do mean Email us because we do want to engage and so that's sort of what and that's the sort of like what I would like to close I would like to know to let all of you know as well Well, I want to thank all of you first for this tremendous resource It was just incredibly rich and seeing I know the work that you put into it over the course of the year So thank you for that But also to thank all of you for your partnership that is in the very truest sense of the word I feel that you are engaging with us. You will care about our values and really feel supported in the best possible way So thank you for being with us today and for your candor and your insights and It's time now for us to close our conference and I'll say a few words then Nancy Lindmore can have the final word But every year at a Passover Seder you say next year in Jerusalem I'd like to say next year to US IP and for all of us to come together again for another set of Wonderful conversations and fellowship. So many people have come up to me for the last few days and said I feel like I'm home I feel like I can talk about these issues that it's just a place of not only excitement, but also a bit of sanctuary So I thank all of you for making that atmosphere possible And being with us. I want to thank all of our peace builders who came from around the world that it just was very striking Like to have your voices here, and I also want to thank all of our American colleagues for being very open about That peace building doesn't happen over there, but we need a lot of it here at home I'd like also if we could bring our AFP full-time staff here so we can give a group Thank you for everyone who's worked so hard. So I don't know is Sarah here Did you want to have a few words before we close Well last week I attended a for a whole week a conference of Europe's leading academies of sciences, and I am here to tell you it was dull This week This week 155 speakers, which made us a lot of new friends Wonderful issues Evaluation finance youth team building storytelling proposals to work on media, which I think we better take advantage of systems we launched a really important report on on smart security and Nest which is necessary for smart peace and by golly I hope one of these wonderful funders will help us and with a marketing strategy for something that I think will have worldwide implications the SDG 16 the neuroscience this field is so dynamic so cutting-edge It's just thrilling to be with you and to hear your stories and to hear your Ideas and your work. So thank you very much Bravo to you and Bravo to you and you Possible at USIP Well, I will just simply add My thanks to everybody who's here today. What a great day and the close of three really Fantastic days. I think a conversation that's happening at a time that is more important than ever and You know, it may in fact be iterative I'm looking off-stage here where we're rediscovering truths that we knew or practices that we've known in the past As Steve mentioned, but the time has never been more urgent And we are seeing an important coalescence where the World Bank as Alex was saying Held a fragility form in which the overwhelming Banner was no peace without development no development without peace So there's an important moment of coalescence here the conversations that you all have had I think are critical for validating for coalescing for Crystallizing things that we're all thinking and doing we are delighted here at USIP to be able to Have this event here for the fifth year of partnership Alliance for peace building is an incredibly important partner for USIP in it and it encompasses this extraordinary membership That you have so I want You know just to once again Thank everybody for being with Being here at USIP today Thank you to Robert Berg for your wonderful leadership and energy and Please join me in once again giving it up for Melanie who has been a stalwart in this field for so long