Learning can and should inform changes in strategy
We reflect in partnership with stakeholders and the communities they serve to adapt
MFH has been in a period of rapid growth because we have…
Reflected on our values and action
Assessed where we are out of alignment
2 of 9
Three MFH Principles
Centering Community
From ideation to implementation, we prioritize the essential insights, lived experience, and expertise that local organizations and community members possess, and work collaboratively to craft and execute strategies that are responsive and accountable to impacted communities and the organizations representing them.
Racial & Health Equity
We intentionally reflect on, uplift, and challenge the historic and current practices, policies, and narratives that create inequitable opportunities, foster environments and circumstances that drive FID, and undermine the ability of marginalized/disenfranchised communities to determine solutions.
Humility, Learning, & Experimentation
We recognize our privilege as foundation and ensure mechanisms are in place to ensure we are constantly listening, learning, and adapting in partnership with organizations with deep ties to communities and promoting flexibility and experimentation for understanding and implementing solutions to complex problems.
3 of 9
Centering Trust, Relationships, & Power Sharing
Moving away from
Moving towards
Design a strategy and share the final draft
Invite field into our thinking sooner, rather than later
Turning over decision-making power to others
Make decisions in isolation
Be explicit about how feedback informs our decision-making
Transparent and open about the rationale behind decisions
Static / Point-in-time assessments
Ongoing feedback loops that prioritize learning in relationship
Analyze those doing the work
Deeply reflect on MFH’s role in the environment and how we show up in relationships
Relationships centered on funding
Deep meaningful relationships that elevate opportunities to build trust, create space for thought partnership
4 of 9
Centering Trust, Relationships, & Power Sharing
5 of 9
MFH’s Initial Approach to MCFR: Consult
Original Purpose: Increase FID research in MO
How did we consult?
MFH convened a group of researchers representing different disciplines to ask what it would take to increase research on FID
How were decisions made?
MFH developed a plan using what they learned from the researchers, including deciding on:
What the vision, goals are
Who to invite to participate
How the work would get done
6 of 9
Insights & Pivot Points
Insights
Pivots
Having more research isn’t inherently helpful
Evidence that does not include community voice isn’t going to be as effective / responsive
Community engaged research requires combo of partners with research skills and relationships with those affected by FID
If you’re not directly addressing power, you risk perpetuating harms
Field of academic FID researchers may not be ready to do this work
Shift to center community-engaged research to inform interventions (rather than any research)
Having Core Partners that represent academic researchers AND community organizations
Thinking more about what processes and learning is necessary rather than developing concrete products
MFH defers to those more closely engaged in the work
SLOW DOWN! Listen, Reflect, Act.
7 of 9
Where We Hope to Be: Collaborate
What might it look like to delegate power to Core Partners?
Group ideating and deciding, rather than MFH deciding and getting buy in, etc.
MFH is thought partner, not thought leader
CPs set goals and make decisions (for example re: goals, membership, advisors).
CPs will have support in making these decisions from MFH, Openfields, members, advisors
Budget resources to support learning, hearing from community experts and academic experts