Search

Begin New Search Topic Funding

11. Diving Deeper: Under the surface of Intermediary Funding

Author:
Global Philanthropy Project (GPP)
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Philanthropy Project (GPP)
Abstract:
Diving Deeper: Under the surface of Intermediary funding data compares data on different types of intermediaries in order to provide greater understanding to the field about how, where, and to whom intermediaries are distributing resources. The brief also examines how government, multilateral, and private foundation funders partner with intermediaries to support global LGBTI rights and development.
Topic:
Development, Human Rights, LGBT+, Data, Philanthropy, and Funding
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. Diving Deeper: Under the Surface of Embassy Funding

Author:
Global Philanthropy Project (GPP)
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Philanthropy Project (GPP)
Abstract:
Diving Deeper: Under the surface of LGBTI embassy funding data examines the extent to which embassies are providing resources for local LGBTI movements, the types of organizations and issues that are supported, as well as best practice examples. At a time when major development assistance streams supporting LGBTI issues are being stretched and in some instances reduced, and when LGBTI organizations face funding shortages, this brief provides government donors and other advocates with evidence about how embassy funding can be used to support and strengthen local movements.
Topic:
Development, LGBT+, Data, Funding, and Embassies
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Shifting the Field: Philanthropy’s role in strengthening child- and youth-led community rooted groups

Author:
Marcela Rueda Gomez
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Elevate Children Funders Group
Abstract:
The objective of this study was to map current practices in philanthropic support for child and youth led work at the community level and provide strategic advice to donors on how to strengthen their funding modalities through participatory approaches. The recommendations from this process will pave the road for members to challenge their own practices; build on momentum to shift money down to the grassroots level; explore ways to influence the broader sector; and influence and shift the wider donor community thinking and approaches.
Topic:
Children, Youth, Philanthropy, Funding, and Grassroots Organizing
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. The EU-UNDP Partnership and Added Value in EU Development Cooperation

Author:
Erik Lundsgaarde
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
European Union (EU) funding for United Nations (UN) organisations has expanded significantly over the last two decades. The EU’s partnership with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is an important example of EU-UN cooperation, and UNDP was the fourth-largest UN recipient of European Commission funds in 2018. Against the backdrop of UN and EU reforms that aim to strengthen multilateralism and promote more integrated development cooperation approaches, this paper outlines priority areas in EU-UNDP cooperation and modes of cooperation. The term “added value” provides an entry point for identifying the rationales for EU funding to UNDP. In EU budgetary discussions, added value is a concept used to inform decisions such as whether to take action at the EU or member state levels or which means of implementation to select. These choices extend to the development cooperation arena, where the term relates to the division of labour agenda and features in assessments of effectiveness. The paper explores three perspectives to consider the added value of funding choices within the EU-UNDP partnership relating to the division of labour between EU institutions and member states, the characteristics of UNDP as an implementation channel and the qualities of the EU as a funder. On the first dimension, the large scale of EU funding for UNDP sets it apart from most member states, though EU funding priorities display elements of specialisation as well as similar emphases to member states. On the second dimension, UNDP’s large scope of work, its implementation capacities and accountability standards are attractive to the EU, but additional criteria – including organisational cost effectiveness – can alter the perception of added value. Finally, the scale of EU funding and the possibility to engage in difficult country contexts are key elements of the added value of the EU as a funder. However, the EU’s non-core funding emphasis presents a challenge for the UN resource mobilisation agenda calling for greater flexibility in organisational funding. Attention to these multiple dimensions of added value can inform future EU choices on how to orient engagement with UNDP to reinforce strengths of the organisation and enable adaptations envisaged in UN reform processes.
Topic:
Development, United Nations, Reform, European Union, Partnerships, and Funding
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. Earmarked Funding for Multilateral Development Cooperation: Asset and Impediment

Author:
Max Otto Baumann and Erik Lundsgaarde
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The United Nations development system and other multilateral organizations have increasingly been funded through earmarked contributions. This has implications for their ability to effectively and independently perform the functions member states’ expect of them.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, United Nations, Multilateralism, Development Aid, and Funding
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Government as the First Investor in Biopharmaceutical Innovation: Evidence From New Drug Approvals 2010–2019

Author:
Ekaterina Cleary, Matthew J. Jackson, and Fred D. Ledley
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
The discovery and development of new medicines classically involves a linear process of basic biomedical research to uncover potential targets for drug action, followed by applied, or translational, research to identify candidate products and establish their effectiveness and safety. This Working Paper describes the public sector contribution to that process by tracing funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) related to published research on each of the 356 new drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from 2010-2019 as well as research on their 218 biological targets. Specifically, we describe the timelines of clinical development for these products and proxy measures of their importance, including designations as first-inclass or expedited approvals. We model the maturation of basic research on the biological targets for drugs to determine the initiation and established points of this research, and demonstrate that none of the 232 products modelled were approved before this enabling research passed the established point. This body of essential research comprised 2 million publications, of which 409 thousand were supported by 317 thousand Funding Years of NIH Project support totaling $156 billion. Research on the 356 drugs comprised 229 thousand publications, of which 36 thousand were supported by 42 thousand Funding Years of NIH Project support totaling $31 billion. Overall, NIH funding contributed to research associated with every new drug approved from 2010-2019, totaling $187 billion. This funding supported investigator-initiated Research Projects, Cooperative Agreements for government-led research on topics of particular importance, as well as Research Program Projects and Centers and training to support the research infrastructure. This NIH funding also produced 22 thousand patents, which provided marketing exclusivity for 27 (8.6%) of the drugs approved 2010-2019. These data demonstrate the essential role of public sector-funded basic research in drug discovery and development, as well as the scale and character of this funding. It also demonstrates the limited mechanisms available for recognizing the value created by these early investments and ensuring appropriate public returns. This analysis demonstrates the importance of sustained public investment in basic biomedical science as well as the need for policy innovations that fully realize the value of public sector investments in pharmaceutical innovation that ensure that these investments yield meaningful improvements in health.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Research, Public Policy, Innovation, State Funding, Pharmaceuticals, and Funding
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

17. Meet the Moment: A Call for Progressive Philanthropic Response to the Anti-Gender Movement

Author:
Teddy Wilson, Jenna Capeci, and Gitta Zomorodi
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Global Philanthropy Project (GPP)
Abstract:
In early 2020, Global Philanthropy Project worked with our member organizations and philanthropic partners to develop two related pieces of private research: 1) a report mapping the funding of the global “anti-gender ideology” or “anti-gender” movement, and 2) a report mapping the progressive philanthropic response. We offer the following public document in order to share key learning and to offer additional analysis gained in the comparison of the two reports. Additionally, we share insights based on comparing global and regional LGBTI funding data as documented in the 2017-2018 Global Resources Report: Government and Philanthropic Support for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex Communities. These findings offer a clear call to action: progressive movements and their philanthropic partners are being outspent by hundreds of millions of dollars each year, and the institutions providing that opposition funding have developed sophisticated and coordinated systems to learn, co-fund, and expand their influence. The philanthropic community is called to recognize the scale of the fight and to be both rigorous and creative in our response. Let us seize this remarkable opportunity to work together and engage our collective learning, spending power, and institutional knowledge to help transform the conditions of our communities. Together we can leverage the collective power that this generational crisis demands.
Topic:
LGBT+, Progressivism, Philanthropy, Funding, Transgender, and Gender Minorities
Political Geography:
Africa, Russia, Europe, Asia, South America, Global Focus, and United States of America

18. COVID-19 Future Trends: Impacts on Children and the Search for Opportunities

Author:
Sol Pradelli
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Elevate Children Funders Group
Abstract:
This short thought-piece was commissioned by ECFG in September 2020 to help members navigate the uncertainty around how COVID would impact children in the longer-term. The paper includes a desk review of the impacts of previous pandemics and economic crises on children; an overview of likely impacts for children of the COVID crisis, including projections by age cohort; four potential scenarios and related planning questions; recommendations for funding, advocacy, and research; and a bibliography of key resources and reports.
Topic:
Children, Advocacy, COVID-19, Funding, and Economic Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

19. Shifting Mindsets | Section 5: Funding

Author:
Alice Obrecht
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
This standalone section of the ALNAP Study Shifting Mindsets: Creating a more flexible humanitarian response focuses on funding for greater flexibility. This is one of the three pillars that flexibility relies upon according to this research and also one of the starting points to make humanitarian responses more flexible. It covers types of humanitarian funding and their relationship to flexibility, characteristics of funding mechanisms that support flexible and adaptive humanitarian action, and the future of flexible bilateral funding.
Topic:
International Organization, Crisis Management, Donors, Funding, and Humanitarian Response
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Pulling Back the Curtain: What Do Non-Funders Think Are the Key Challenges, Needs, Gaps and Opportunities in Supporting Children and Young People Facing Adversity?

Author:
Ghazal Keshavarzian and Ariel Carroll
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Elevate Children Funders Group
Abstract:
One of Elevate Children Funders Group’s (ECFG) overarching goals is to map emerging trends, gaps and opportunities across the children and youth in adversity field. To this end, the ECFG Secretariat recently undertook an exercise and asked non-funders for their input. It is a rare opportunity for non-funders to honestly and anonymously share with funders their candid feedback of what is working and not working. By sharing and learning together, we can both deepen our knowledge and ensure better outcomes for children and young people the world over. In July-August 2019, the ECFG Secretariat shared a six-question survey with over 70 non-funder stakeholders representing academia, think tanks, networks, UN agencies, international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community-based organizations, human rights organizations and youth-led organizations around the world. These stakeholders work in the field of violence prevention, child protection, children’s care, early childhood development, mental health, youth empowerment, child and youth rights, and education. ECFG received responses from 30 stakeholders, representing: international NGOs (67.9%); networks (14.3%); academia or think tanks (10.7%); and national NGOs (7.1%). Forty-two percent are based in North America, thirty-six percent in Europe and the United Kingdom, one representative in Latin America; and three representatives in South and Southeast Asia. All responses were in English, except for one (Spanish).
Topic:
Civil Society, Children, Advocacy, Survey, and Funding
Political Geography:
Global Focus