Related
What we did
Over the following three months, London Funders convened nine meetings, with the first roundtable held on the 26 August. As an immediate action, we set up an online spreadsheet for funders to share which relevant organisations they were already funding, and which they were considering funding or would like to have conversations with. From this, we identified clusters of active funders who were engaged with two Afghan-led, London-based organisations.
The purpose of agreeing these principles was to avoid these organisations having to manage multiple funding applications and relationships at a time when demand was high.
Over the following three months, London Funders convened nine meetings, with the first roundtable held on the 26 August. As an immediate action, we set up an online spreadsheet for funders to share which relevant organisations they were already funding, and which they were considering funding or would like to have conversations with. From this, we identified clusters of active funders who were engaged with two Afghan-led, London-based organisations.
The second meeting asked funders to agree a set of principles for managing and aligning any additional grants to these organisations. The purpose of agreeing these principles was to avoid these organisations having to manage multiple funding applications and relationships at a time when demand was high. We then contacted the organisations and invited them to come and meet (separately) with a group of funders to share what support they needed.
In addition to the meetings with specific organisations, we held three sessions with funders to map out the short (immediate and crisis needs), medium (advice and employment) and long term (policy and influencing) issues arising from the crisis in Afghanistan. Given that the Nationality and Borders Bill - which makes significant changes to the asylum system and the rights of refugees - was making its way through Parliament at the same time, the need to support civil society on policy and influencing work was as immediate as getting clothes, food and other support into the hotels where people fleeing Afghanistan were placed.
During this time, we also developed a Refugee Resource Hub for funders on our website. We supported the GLA and London Community Foundation to develop and launch the London Refugee Response appeal. We worked closely with Migration Exchange who were liaising with national organisations such as Refugee Action and the British Refugee Council and coordinating funders across the country, ensuring what happened in London took account of expertise and actions elsewhere. And finally, in November, we convened two meetings to review what we now knew and explore what further action we might take.
What we’ve learned
We know from previous experience that in a crisis there is a moment when it is possible to capture and act on funders’ appetite to do more and to do it in different ways – bypassing application processes for conversations, making faster decisions and allowing funding to be used more flexibly. What we and members had also learned from previous crises is that whilst short term crisis grants are essential, longer-term commitments are also needed. It was clear in August that the needs of this group of refugees were not going to be solved within six months. The Afghan funder response was therefore an unusual mix of both crisis response and addressing long-term needs. We saw funders doing all of: taking restrictions off current grants, making additional grants to organisations they already knew, proactively getting in touch with organisations identified on the online spreadsheet to invite a new application, and considering significant investment over three years.
We know that these funding discussions were linked to the agreed needs analysis and core funding ask the groups discussed with funders in our meetings, but it is not yet clear whether the award of funding will be coordinated or aligned between the funders who are engaged in supporting each group. We do think that there is value, in the same way that 360Giving captures and makes visible where funding is going after grants have been made, in capturing intention and interest by funders in organisations in advance of funding, or even of application. We’ll explore this further with partners.
We do think that there is value, in the same way that 360Giving captures and makes visible where funding is going after grants have been made, in capturing intention and interest by funders in organisations in advance of funding, or even of application.
Sharing information and building intelligence was the key reason for funders to come together, and members valued the meetings for this purpose alone. Funders rightly want to understand what the problem is before they commit funds to a solution. However, much like the experience at the beginning of the covid-19 pandemic in March 2020, funders were having to take a leap of faith.
The situation of Afghan refugees in the UK was complex, with the Government setting out two different routes to resettlement, on which the criteria and rights are still shifting four months later, along with Afghans already in the UK with leave to remain and those whose previous claims had been turned down and are now undocumented.
It was also almost impossible, even for our public sector members, to get a firm picture of the total numbers of people and where they were initially (quarantine hotels), where they would be moved to (bridging hotels) and where long-term accommodation would be offered – numbers moved between boroughs across London, and also moved out of London and then sometimes back in again. The learning here may not be for London Funders members but for central government: we’ve seen how local civil society groups responded quickly to people in their areas, we’ve seen amazing volunteer action and we’ve seen the appetite of funders to support – this energy and good will could be harnessed even more effectively if solid information is made available.
And finally, we think that engaging in the Afghan Response meetings will have highlighted the complexities of the immigration system to funders who are not already active in this space. The Government’s stated intention for people fleeing Afghanistan was to provide welcome, safety and a route to a settled future. Most people arriving in the UK as desperate refugees who have fled their lives and homes with nothing are not welcomed in this way. Instead, they are faced by an intentionally hostile immigration system, not allowed to work, and have no recourse to public funds. The refugee, asylum and migration sector work unbelievably hard with minimal resources to provide crisis support and access to legal advice whilst campaigning for changes in the law but is fighting against increasingly hostile legislation. What will also have become clear is the assumption that extra money will solve the problem – it doesn’t work if organisations do not have the capacity to respond to growing demand. Our Funding Strategy for Immigration Advice, published in the summer, sets out what funders can do, individually and collaboratively to invest in a pipeline of skills and expertise so that organisations responding on the ground can begin to grow sustainable solutions.
We will continue to monitor the situation and to bring funders together when there are opportunities to do so. If you’d like to be involved in future Afghan Response work or wider conversations about funding Immigration Advice, please get in touch!