he global funding community is at an inflection point when it comes to supporting mental health and wellbeing. Efforts to reduce the stigma around mental health issues have gained traction, shifting society’s views on mental health and what wellbeing should mean to everyone, universally. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this change, as mental health and wellbeing came further into focus. These shifts have encouraged more funders to enter the space, which has boosted funding as we seek to address one of the defining challenges of our generation.
While these are welcome developments, they are not enough—even with the recent influx of resources, deeply rooted inequities and injustices persist within and between countries. At the same time, philanthropy is often criticized for being top-down, undemocratic, and out-of-touch with the voices and needs of communities. Over more than a decade of work on health focused initiatives in India, the Rural India Supporting Trust has learned key lessons about how funders can meaningfully and ethically support our partners toward transformative change.
It is crucial for funding organizations to understand the impact that either their financial support or direct program implementation is having. In order to be effective at this, we must also be open to examining the processes we undertake to ensure maximum positive impact with minimum intrusion and discomfort to the communities we aim to assist.
Grantee, Community Leadership
The most impactful mental health and wellbeing programs are the ones that listen to community members as they express their priorities and needs. Organizations that support such programs need to align themselves with partner organizations (grantees) who understand the local context and can advise on what is desired at the grassroots level, not dictate interventions from the top down. Clear goals with objectives aimed at achieving them are imperative. Understanding theories of change are an important part of creating long lasting and fruitful programming, so finding partners with the capacity to engage and include all facets at the local level is a must.
Iterative Capacity Development
It is the responsibility of funding entities to avail resources to their grantees for proper monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL), not just at the program level but for the organization as a whole. If “we” want sustainable programs that progress in their effectiveness over time, we must also build the capacity of local and partner organizations to understand what works (what doesn’t) and why. With this knowledge, programs can be altered and evolve for consistent improvement. Grantees have different levels of ability when it comes to MEL, so it is in a funder’s best interest to allow for this within their MEL requirements. One size does not fit all in this case. When evaluation is approached as a collaborative, evolving exercise that is key to driving impact, rather than an arduous funder requirement, transformative change can happen.
Diversify Metrics
Mental health and wellbeing are a very intersectional issue area. Programming can cut across health, education, disability, gender, environment, systemic justice, and other areas. Mental health and wellbeing initiatives can range from more “traditional” psychology-based clinical programs targeting anxiety and depression, to youth-driven initiatives that integrate clinical mental health resources with ancient Indigenous wisdom on spirituality and relationship to the land.
Rather than picking a few quantitative metrics and forcing every grantee to adhere to them, funders have an opportunity to partner with grantees who consider a diverse portfolio of metrics. This may create a situation where there is the development of new metrics that mix quantitative and qualitative data where appropriate.
Collective Impact
It is important for funders to think of impact not just at the level of a single standalone project, but also collectively. Too often, we miss opportunities to connect and weave together amazing community-led or -driven work done by separate grantees. I have seen impactful mental health and wellbeing work in India influenced by innovations and approaches from many different countries in the Global South and North, and vice versa. One example is an initiative in Chennai that, supported by a network of research hubs, brings together the strengths of school-based interventions in places including Canada, Ireland, Kenya, and India together with local communities’ insights. We have an opportunity to learn from networks of impact, where the efforts of multiple locally-led and driven groups across different cultures and contexts can add up to a whole greater than the sum of its parts. By taking a collective impact lens, funders can support significant impacts in the short-term while also contributing to a stronger and better-connected mental health and wellbeing ecosystem.
Taking a more progressive approach to conceptualizing and evaluating impact, and supporting grantees in this domain, is just one change area of many that are necessary for a more effective and just funding system. Funders open to learning, adapting and innovating are key to ushering in the future of funding to support mental health and wellbeing initiatives.
a global affairs media network
The Future of Funding to Support Mental Health and Wellbeing
Image courtesy of Thanuj Mathew via Unsplash.
October 16, 2023
As efforts to reduce the stigma around mental health and wellbeing bear fruit, funding is on the rise. Yet to meet real needs, funding must overcome systemic inequities in the philanthropy space which persist within and between countries, writes RIST’s Shweta Rawat.
T
he global funding community is at an inflection point when it comes to supporting mental health and wellbeing. Efforts to reduce the stigma around mental health issues have gained traction, shifting society’s views on mental health and what wellbeing should mean to everyone, universally. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated this change, as mental health and wellbeing came further into focus. These shifts have encouraged more funders to enter the space, which has boosted funding as we seek to address one of the defining challenges of our generation.
While these are welcome developments, they are not enough—even with the recent influx of resources, deeply rooted inequities and injustices persist within and between countries. At the same time, philanthropy is often criticized for being top-down, undemocratic, and out-of-touch with the voices and needs of communities. Over more than a decade of work on health focused initiatives in India, the Rural India Supporting Trust has learned key lessons about how funders can meaningfully and ethically support our partners toward transformative change.
It is crucial for funding organizations to understand the impact that either their financial support or direct program implementation is having. In order to be effective at this, we must also be open to examining the processes we undertake to ensure maximum positive impact with minimum intrusion and discomfort to the communities we aim to assist.
Grantee, Community Leadership
The most impactful mental health and wellbeing programs are the ones that listen to community members as they express their priorities and needs. Organizations that support such programs need to align themselves with partner organizations (grantees) who understand the local context and can advise on what is desired at the grassroots level, not dictate interventions from the top down. Clear goals with objectives aimed at achieving them are imperative. Understanding theories of change are an important part of creating long lasting and fruitful programming, so finding partners with the capacity to engage and include all facets at the local level is a must.
Iterative Capacity Development
It is the responsibility of funding entities to avail resources to their grantees for proper monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL), not just at the program level but for the organization as a whole. If “we” want sustainable programs that progress in their effectiveness over time, we must also build the capacity of local and partner organizations to understand what works (what doesn’t) and why. With this knowledge, programs can be altered and evolve for consistent improvement. Grantees have different levels of ability when it comes to MEL, so it is in a funder’s best interest to allow for this within their MEL requirements. One size does not fit all in this case. When evaluation is approached as a collaborative, evolving exercise that is key to driving impact, rather than an arduous funder requirement, transformative change can happen.
Diversify Metrics
Mental health and wellbeing are a very intersectional issue area. Programming can cut across health, education, disability, gender, environment, systemic justice, and other areas. Mental health and wellbeing initiatives can range from more “traditional” psychology-based clinical programs targeting anxiety and depression, to youth-driven initiatives that integrate clinical mental health resources with ancient Indigenous wisdom on spirituality and relationship to the land.
Rather than picking a few quantitative metrics and forcing every grantee to adhere to them, funders have an opportunity to partner with grantees who consider a diverse portfolio of metrics. This may create a situation where there is the development of new metrics that mix quantitative and qualitative data where appropriate.
Collective Impact
It is important for funders to think of impact not just at the level of a single standalone project, but also collectively. Too often, we miss opportunities to connect and weave together amazing community-led or -driven work done by separate grantees. I have seen impactful mental health and wellbeing work in India influenced by innovations and approaches from many different countries in the Global South and North, and vice versa. One example is an initiative in Chennai that, supported by a network of research hubs, brings together the strengths of school-based interventions in places including Canada, Ireland, Kenya, and India together with local communities’ insights. We have an opportunity to learn from networks of impact, where the efforts of multiple locally-led and driven groups across different cultures and contexts can add up to a whole greater than the sum of its parts. By taking a collective impact lens, funders can support significant impacts in the short-term while also contributing to a stronger and better-connected mental health and wellbeing ecosystem.
Taking a more progressive approach to conceptualizing and evaluating impact, and supporting grantees in this domain, is just one change area of many that are necessary for a more effective and just funding system. Funders open to learning, adapting and innovating are key to ushering in the future of funding to support mental health and wellbeing initiatives.
