6 Comments

1. Tim Rease

   Posted September 10, 2009 at 11:31 AM

   Dear Monika and Marieke,

   I was surprised and pleased to see your statement (white paper) titled “Mother Centers as a Business” described as a reflection on the difficulties involved in creating financial sustainability for Mother Centers through an entrepreneurial approach. I had not seen this document before.

   I see that it is placed on MINE letterhead so I assume this is a formal whitepaper/statement from MINE? Also, I miss seeing a date on the document so am not sure when this was formulated. Can the date be added for reference?

   There are multiple statements and philosophies put forwarded in this document that I would like to address, based on my experience with entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship as well as my personal observations over the past 1.5 years with the leaders and activities of MINE. In some cases, I believe that an understanding of the concepts and principles of social entrepreneurship are not understood as posited in this document. Social entrepreneurship has a very sound critical foundation and is active throughout the world - academically through critical research oriented study as well as applying these principles in active programs.

   I would ask, that upon my reply to this document, can we open a new category on your site, called Mother Centers and Social Entrepreneurship, where comments are open and we can continue a constructive and critical discussion?

   - Tim

   Reply
   • Monika Jaeckel

     Posted September 10, 2009 at 2:02 PM

     Hi Tim,
     The documeent was written in the summer/fall of 2005, when we started such a debate with an indian NGO (SSP). I do recall it was one of the (many) documents we gave you, when we met and started our debates. We did rather swamp you with a lot to read at that time. Anyway, we would welcome a further debate, but I think relating it to this specific document would be better than creating a general new category and general debate. The document spells out our specific dilemmas and it would be helpful in the debate to directly relate to these. Monika

     Reply
     • Tim Rease

       Posted September 10, 2009 at 4:21 PM

       I understand and sorry that I dont remember seeing it. With the subject of funding for Mother Centers, it is a very important topic; I would expect that anyone searching for Mother Centers funding will come across it. Since it was written 4 years ago, was your intention to put it publicly on your website more of one as a historical statement or is the document intended as a current reference point for the Mother Center funding issue? And secondly, does it need to be updated with any experiences over the past 4 years, before the dialogue continues?

       Reply
       • Monika Jaeckel

         Posted September 11, 2009 at 11:01 AM

         Hi Tim!
         The document sums up years of experiences in the whole Mother Center movement and points to structural barriers that do not change easily and certainly have not changed in the last four years. So indeed the document is still a current reference point for any current fundraising activities for Mother Centers. It points to the barriers that need to be overcome, so clever strategies that manage to get through or side step these obstacles are needed.

         Reply
2. Tim Rease

   Posted September 10, 2009 at 1:36 PM

   With the first read of the article “Economic bottlenecks of the Mother Center Movement”, here are some initial thoughts and questions, with the intent of promoting dialogue and clarification, and leading to ideas/actions to work towards solving the challenge. In the text below, I have not agreed with some of the statements of the document; NOTE this is not to be critical of the efforts, but to suggest that the conclusions presented in the document are not definitive and through further dialogue, another explanation and path is available:

   1) concept of local funding not available
   Mother Centers provide necessary components to a healthy constructive social infrastructure, which is often lacking and needs improvement. What is not addressed is that Mother Centers, by their nature, provide services of a domestic and educational nature, which a local social system are fundamentally tasked with and have the responsibility to provide. This creates a competitive, and at the worst, an antagonistic environment, in providing them.

   Part of this situation also is the maturity and implementation of the social system. In many third world countries, this social infrastructure is not mature enough to supply these services themselves, so it is ineffective to expect that these systems will supply funds/capital to a third party to, in essence, do their job for them. We can howl about the inhumanity and that they should, yet the reality is that the system is not mature enough for this kind of relationship or cooperation. This explains the reason why Mother Centers have remained single initiatives in these countries.

   Social welfare governments, such as the Netherlands, is more mature, yet their foundation principles are that they will provide these services for those living in this environment. When formulating a strategy, this must be taken into account and addressed with a solution that meets and fits within their social system. The question of why MINE has not been able to find donors or sponsors should be individually analyzed and a strategy developed.

   2 - Invisibility of Services
   The document claims that public funding makes the services provided by the Mother Centers invisible, but does not cite examples or accepted theory for this occurrence. Visibility of an activity is dependent upon public relations and media work; in most organizations, public relations is the largest investment of capital. I propose that his invisibility is a lack of focused activity and engagement within the greater institutional public relations system rather than a result of public funding.

   Any grassroots movement requires an enormous investment initially of voluntary human resources and it has been cited and documented thoroughly that burnout is the usual consequence. The strategy with grassroots movement is to balance the investment of these human resources with activities that will generate the most beneficial outcomes. I propose that these activities for the Mother Centers have not been reviewed or balanced sufficiently.

   The claim that grassroots knowledge given for free to government/social systems contributes to its lack of influence. This idea of value of expertise has been throughly documented and studied with the understanding, typically, that the value of the knowledge in initial grassroots movements is bound to the leadership and negotiation expertise of the leader. There are numerous techniques and documentation available to teach grassroot leaders the expertise to instill value in their expertise. Fundamentally, it comes down to the respect and trust between the leader and the social/goverment system.

   I understand that there are numerous examples within the Mother Center movement of where follow up contacts have been given to professional contracts, yet has there been an analysis of why this occurs? and subsequently, a strategy developed to mitigate this?

   The document claims that the more Mother Centers have become successful in local governance, the poorer they have become because the time and resources they have spent are not renumerated. This seems to be a merging of several ideas. If they were truly successful in local governance, then why were they not renumerated considering that the Mother Centers provide a needed aspect to the social system? I suggest that they were not successful from a holistic view of what the Mother Center movement is promoting. A definition of the success of Mother Center/social system interaction is needed with a following plan/strategy of how a mother center organization, whether individual, local, regional, national, and international, is needed.

   3) How to finance the public living room
   Mother Centers provide in many ways, a similar society function as a community center or neighborhood center, when viewed from the perspective of the society administrator. In addition, the Mother Center provides domestic, social services, and adult education. Are these not the same responsibilities that the societal government system has?

   So in seeking financing, the funding from a mature local social/government system is for a duplicate agency.
   In the case where the social system is not mature, then funding must come from international development organizations - both private as in an NGO or as an international government aid body.

   In terms of financing directly from the Mother Center participants, one has to consider the socio-economic status of these individuals. Do they have the expertise or funding themselves to accomplish this? The answer is a qualified yes, to a certain level of organizational complexity. This has been demonstrated by the proliferation of the Mother Centers throughout the world. However, in social systems where basic human needs are not met, then it is incompatible to think that these individuals will provide capital (human or monetary) for a mothercenter when they must struggle to meet their own needs. I saw many examples of this as I read the stories from the different Mother Centers in the world.

   Another point about financing is that all social/aid bodies have fidiciurary responsibilty for their funds and efforts. This means that they are accountable to their donors and to the guidelines of their organization for bestowing funding. Do the Mother Centers leaders understand what these responsbilities are, from these organizations? Do the Mother Center leaders have the expertise to manage these funds? Has the Mother Center’s leaders presented themselves to these organizations such that they instill confidence and trust that the social/aid bodies can satisfy their fidicuiary requirement?

   (More to come - up to page 2 of the document)

   Reply
3. Tim Rease

   Posted September 17, 2009 at 11:25 AM

   continuation of comments on document

   on page three, there is a statement that the quality of services is expected to come with an even lower price[...]that caregiving and caring is expected to come for free when in the context of family and neighborhood relationships. With this claim, it would be good to have itemized references and published research supporting this claim, with the intent to place it in context and within the social/governmental structure. Not every situation fits this claim and a potential donor that reads this will immediately recognize that it doesnt, with a likely consequences that they will not believe the other claims or need.

   Comment on the Bosnia example.
   It seems very reasonable that within the Bosnian society, the types of services mentioned would not support a mothercenter. What is missing here, is what the advice would be to an individual seeking funding within this context. More work is needed to identify likely funding sources that have the responsibility and mission to provide for this environment - such as NGOs or international government aid organizations.

   page 4 - comments on “Who is the market clients for general benefits for society?” I strongly believe there is no question of the benefit of mother centers once they are understood. I think it is self-defeating to tie the lack of funding of a mother center to a perceived perception of low value. My belief to accomplishing this in today’s world of funding is to do the analysis of these benefits and values with the mission and responsibilitis of funding agencies, and do it in the framework and terms that funders are accustomed to working with. For example, i began the work of collecting this information based on the claims and statements of different leaders within the mother centers yet had difficulty in finding evidence-based information which supported their claims. I have no doubt that the claims are true however it is very different perception by funding individuals when provided with a list of the names of each of the mothercenters with geographic and demographic information contrasted to an individual stating that this is the number. We have to remember that the funding organizations have fidicuiary responsibility for their funds and if they are asked to account for their allocations, they must have the necessary information THEY need to do their job. Though many in the mother center movement claim that this information is self-evident and they should be believed as an individual, we must give them the information they need to do their jobs successfully.

   page 5.
   there is a comment “Where do these resources come from? What is the economic/monetary value of networking, in what way is can it be made visible and marketable? Who pays for the overhead of coordination, consulting, development of new ideas and projects, when it is hard to convince network members to pay for this and when no public funding, donor or grant givers seem to be interested in the networking and advocacy dimension of grassroots movements?

   My immediate question is WHY? Why arent they interested when there is so much value with the Mother Centers? I propose that it is because they dont understand how the Mother Center concept integrates within their organization’s mission, and that they dont have the necessary documenting information to support the claims in order to fund a mother center project.

   COMMENTS FOR FUTURE FUND SEEKING INDIVIDUALS
   —————————————–

   1) First - dont give up. Just because an organization tells you they will not fund your group DOES NOT mean that Mother Centers have no value. Reasons for not funding could be that: a) they do not have funds available, b) it is not within their mission or responsiblity for funding such projects, c) they have an incorrect perception of the role of a mother center within the community, d) they believe the fund would be mismanaged, or e) the information provided about the mother center is not sufficient to meet their fiduciary requirements

   1) Understand how the Mother Center fits within the local social/government institution. Consider its position within the local, national and international government structures. Do the research and analsysis and answer the questions of if it is reasonable to expect funding at these different level

   2) investigate and research a potential funding source to understand their mission and fiduciary responsibilities

   3) If you do not know how to do these things, find a colleague or agency to help you. They are out there, throughout the world. Take the time and invest your energy to find them. Ask for help, yet be sure you have done your work first.

   4) Did i mention dont give up? There are millions of dollars and euros available for programs and aid projects. Realize you cannot just go to their office or home and ask for thousands of dollars for your program. Place yourself in their position and consider how you would react if you had thousands of dollars to give out to agencies but wanted to be sure that the funds were used in the best way for the common good. when you take the time to organize your request into a structure that THEY understand and meets THEIR structure and requirements, then it is very probable.

   5) Consider partnering with other agencies that have skillsets and proven experience and reputation. If your organization is too small to administer funds, then find another organization to partner with. Almost every country has an education university with a social sciences department - start there to see if you can find someone to help you with this.

   6) It can be very easy to fall into the trap of blaming other organizations for not helping you. Dont play the victim game. It may be true that indeed some dont help you, but ask yourself first if YOU have done your homework and confirmed your approach with professionals that you are indeed doing all the things you could be doing, to be successful in a funding award.

   7) Do your best. That is all anyone can every expect of you. No one individual can ever be expected to have all the answers, yet it is important to know our individual limitations and when to add other expertise to the team. When you think you are doing your best, take the time to confirm your approach and actions with other experts. We are all human and sometimes our sense of ourselves can get in the way of finding the best, most effective course of action.

   ——–

   Dont give up. Do your best. Change the world; one step at a time.

   =========
   Tim Rease
   Amsterdam

   Reply