FEWO Committee Report

EQUALITY-SEEKING ORGANIZATIONS AND WOMEN’S GROUPS SPEAK ABOUT FUNDING

Many of the groups which appeared before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women described the impact of the shift from core funding to an exclusive reliance on project-based funding. The Committee heard that the move from core funding of women’s organizations toward project funding has made it difficult to sustain a women’s movement in Canada and made it increasingly difficult for the women’s movement to advocate on behalf of women. The Committee heard that the focus on projects had led to the creation of useful “outputs” or tools, but made it difficult for groups at the national and grassroot level to make effective use of those tools. Most participants agreed on the need to provide both core and project funding; on the importance of consulting equality seeking organizations in the development of funding models; and on the need to address the many issues which are common to the wider voluntary sector.

Mix of Funding Mechanisms

Women’s organizations have a wealth of knowledge about project-based as well as core operational funding. They should be involved in the design of a new model. (Brief submitted by Women’s Economic Equality Society)

The groups which participated in the roundtables organized by the Committee on 3 and 10 May 2005 agreed that there was a need for both project funding and core funding. They told the Committee that sustaining funding (or core funding) allows them to cover infrastructure costs and to leverage more funding. Witnesses told the Committee that they require stable funding to:

• explore options to address and redress the root causes of women’s inequality over and above the short-term responses to inequality;
  
  
• leverage funding from other sources; and
  
  
• ensure the economic viability of equality-seeking organizations between funded projects.

At the same time, they noted that project funding allowed new organizations to emerge and encouraged organizations to be innovative and to focus on results.

What is needed is mixed funding that better reflects the actual circumstances in which these groups work, by making sure they have the infrastructures they need to carry out their projects. (Danielle Hébert, General Coordinator, Fédération des femmes du Québec, 10 May 2005)

There was general consensus that the pool of funding in the Women’s Program would need to be increased in order to accommodate a mix of core and project funding.

RECOMMENDATION 1:

The Committee reiterates the recommendation made in its 10 February 2005 report, calling on the federal government to increase funding to the Women’s Program at Status of Women Canada by at least 25% for investments in women’s groups and equality seeking organizations.

Certain witnesses commented that program officers from Status of Women Canada have told them that the Department could reconsider the issue of core funding once the Women’s Program budget was increased. Although the Committee reiterates the recommendation it made in its previous (10 February) report calling for increased funding for the Women’s Program, it emphasizes the importance of making changes to how the funding is distributed as soon as possible. Equality-seeking organizations want both core funding and project funding, therefore the Committee recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 2:

That Status of Women Canada immediately take advantage of the ongoing review of the Women’s Program to revise the funding to organizations by introducing a mix of core funding and project funding.

Funding Issues Common to the Wider Voluntary Sector

The Canadian Council on Social Development (CCSD), which has been sharing the findings of the report funded by the Voluntary Sector Initiative, Funding Matters: The Impact of Canada’s New Funding Regime on Nonprofit and Voluntary Organizations since its release in 2003, notes that the funding issues faced by equality seeking organizations are similar to those faced by the wider voluntary sector. These issues include volatility in revenue; a tendency to be pulled from the primary mission of the organization; the loss of infrastructure; reporting overload; requirements of financial or in kind contributions from a variety of sources to secure additional funding; difficulties engaging in advocacy activities; and human resource fatigue.

Advocacy-oriented organizations that seek systemic social change have a particularly difficult fundraising challenge. Their work is almost always rejected by corporate funders, and is rarely supported by foundations and United Way/Centraide. Status of Women Canada is one of the very rare funders that explicitly recognize the value of this change-oriented work. (Brief submitted by the Child Care Coalition of Manitoba)

The Voluntary Sector Initiative (VSI) is an initiative between the Government of Canada and the voluntary sector that was launched in June 2000. The VSI is focused on strengthening the relationship between the voluntary sector and the government and enhancing the capacity of the voluntary sector. In 2002, the Joint Accord Table of the Voluntary Sector Initiative released a Code of Good Practice on Funding: Building on An Accord Between the Government of Canada and the Voluntary Sector ^[8] to guide interactions between the Government of Canada and the voluntary sector on funding policies and practices. The Code identifies specific measures to enhance the flexibility, responsiveness and consistency of funding arrangements between the federal government and the voluntary sector.

The Committee was particularly concerned to hear that, in spite of the adoption of the Code “things have not gotten any better… and in some cases have gotten worse” (Darlene Bessey, Voluntary Sector Forum, 10 May 2005). Because the Code contains concrete commitments to address many of the negative impacts of the current funding environment, the Committee recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 3:

That the Government of Canada, through its central agencies, ensure that all new and renewed funding programs incorporate the commitments undertaken by the Government of Canada in the Code of Good Practice on Funding, particularly the commitment to “reach decisions about the funding process through collaborative processes”; and

RECOMMENDATION 4:

That Status of Women Canada take advantage of the current evaluation of the Women’s Program to implement new funding processes which could position Status of Women Canada as a leader in the application of the Code of Good Practice on Funding.

TOP OF PAGE

Collaborative Process to Determine Funding Process

Change is necessary, it must come soon. The particulars of a formula require a coast to coast conversation amongst women’s groups at all levels to come to an understanding of what will foster the achievements of equality guarantees in Canada. (Brief submitted by the Coalition for Gender Equality)

There was widespread consensus among witnesses on the importance of engaging equality-seeking organizations in a meaningful consultation on future directions for funding through the Women’s Program. Equality seeking organizations have shown great resiliency and creativity in light of the changing funding environment over the past decade — a creativity which the Committee feels would help the Women’s Program become a best practice among federal government funding programs. The Committee recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 5:

That Status of Women Canada immediately engage equality seeking organizations in meaningful consultation to determine future directions for the Women’s Program.

The Human Cost of the Current Funding Process

I feel as if, “ who wants to do this job any more? ”…We’re supposed to be manager of the project, we’re supposed to find funds, we’re supposed to do the front line work, and the list goes on. When does it end? (Sharon Taylor, Executive Director, Wolseley Family Place, 3 May 2005)

The Committee was impressed with the dedication of witnesses to the valuable work they do in bringing about greater equality between men and women and in meeting the needs of women across this country. It was saddened to hear about the human toll that the current funding environment imposed, both in terms of a reduced ability to serve the population, and in terms of the burn out of staff. Witnesses told the Committee that they need stable funding in order to

• prevent turn-over of staff and subsequent loss of capacity; and
  
  
• provide staff with competitive levels of compensation which recognize the valuable contribution of the voluntary sector.

In a brief to the Committee, the Canadian Council on Social Development noted that in the private sector, “if an organization does not price what it sells in such a way as to completely cover all of its costs, it will soon cease to exist.” ^[9] The same is true for non profit organizations who are unable to cover all of their costs. This has resulted in the loss of a number of equality seeking organizations in Canada. For other organizations, the short-fall in funding has been borne out by overworked staff. Many of the witnesses have told us that the funding they receive does not allow them to adequately cover the indirect human resource costs involved with managing a project, making it difficult to hire a full time executive director and to provide the necessary administrative support for the organization.

You’re writing proposals on weekends and in the evening because you too are working on project-based funding. (Doreen Parsons, Women’s Economic Equality Society, 3 May 2005)

Status of Women Canada has told the Committee that it plans to examine best practices in funding in its ongoing evaluation of the Women’s Program. The Committee suggests that Status of Women Canada explore the best practice developed by the Canadian Council on Social Development and the former Human Resource Development Canada in the treatment of indirect cost. It further recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 6:

That Status of Women Canada develop fair and consistent practices which recognize the indirect costs to be covered by Women’s Program funding, and that these practices be developed in collaboration with equality seeking organizations.

Who Should be Eligible for Funding?

Most witnesses expressed a strong desire to avoid funding models which would pit organizations against each other for limited funding dollars, however there was much discussion about how to allocate the limited funding currently available under the Women’s Program.

Several of the groups which appeared before the Committee proposed the establishment of general eligibility criteria for Women’s Program funding, suggesting that funding should go to organizations with a democratic structure, that are engaged in work leading to systemic change, and which have a gender equality/women’s equality mandate.

Groups were less likely to agree about the types of organizations which should be eligible for funding, however. Some witnesses felt that the interests of specific groups of women, such as rural women and visible minority women, would not be advanced if funding were limited to national and regional women’s organizations. Some witnesses suggested that service oriented organizations had access to more funding opportunities, and should not be eligible for funding through the Women’s Program. Other witnesses felt that service delivery organizations should be able to apply for funding for their advocacy work. Several witnesses expressed concern that, given the limited funding available, organizations which do not have an equality seeking mandate are receiving project funding from the Women’s Program. While the worthiness of these projects was not in question, there was concern that this funding practice did not help sustain existing equality seeking organizations.

Groups also expressed frustration that their requests for funding from federal government funding programs were often redirected to Status of Women Canada. As a result, the Committee recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 7:

That Status of Women Canada work with other federal government departments to raise awareness about the importance of funding gender projects relevant to the funding mandates of those departments.

RECOMMENDATION 8:

That Status of Women Canada explore eligibility criteria for Women’s Program funding through meaningful consultation with equality seeking organizations.

RECOMMENDATION 9:

That Status of Women Canada act now to enter into funding agreements for a minimum period of three years.