Moving beyond prize philanthropy towards impact

‘Prize Philanthropy’ is not a term most global citizens would be familiar with. However, for more than 120 years the world annually celebrates one notable form of ‘Prize Philanthropy’ – the six Nobel Prizes awarded to discoveries that ‘confer great benefit to humankind’.

While few question the merit of the Nobel Prize as a tool for promoting discovery and innovation, the Prize Philanthropy model itself comes in myriad forms and is driven by varied motivations.

Observers comment that at its best, ‘prize philanthropy’ is guided by a clear vision, well-defined objectives and clearly articulated goals. At its worst, ‘prize philanthropy’ is often little more than a public relations exercise aimed at strengthening brand recognition.

In 2020, the Singapore-based Octava Foundation approached MIT Solve – an initiative committed to social innovation - to collaborate and consider options for utilizing a Prize Philanthropy approach to help identify innovations aimed at addressing educational disadvantage in South-East Asia.

This commenced an iterative process of discussion and debate which resulted in the Octava Foundation Social Innovation Challenge (OSIC) being initiated, aimed at seeking ‘accessible and affordable EdTech solutions focused on underserved K-12 learners that utilize evidence-based educational content informed by the science of learning.'

From the outset, the effort was clearsighted around the context it was aiming to impact. COVID-19 had just struck, children were out of school right across SE Asia, and eyes were on EdTech to provide a solution to what at the time looked like a challenge of existential proportions for traditional education delivery methods. In order to ensure breadth of learning, a decision was taken early to ensure the Challenge allowed a ‘broad funnel’ to capture a diversity of ideas.

The Foundation also determined to complement the prize on offer with a multi-dimensional Support Program that would provide data, networks and capacity building aimed at providing holistic support that best positioned organizations to progress.

Early in the Challenge process, the Research and Communications Group (RCG) was approached to provide multi-faceted support to the Octava Foundation, including acting as a ‘critical friend’ with which Foundation leadership could bounce ideas, receive frank feedback and have theories underpinning Foundation decision-making challenged and tested.

What follows are RCG reflections on the OSIC through the lens of a literature review previously undertaken by RCG examining what constitutes a strong, well-rounded and outcome-oriented approach to fostering innovation through Prize Philanthropy. It draws on information gathered through RCG’s monitoring of the overall Octava Social Innovation Challenge process, including interviews with all key contributors and participants.

Successful approaches to Prize Philanthropy have absolute clarity of vision and objectives

Common across much literature related to Prize Philanthropy is the importance of the funding agency being clear in terms of their vision and the context they are aiming to impact – including a willingness to draw in consultant expertise as required. Some observers see external technical input as essential for reasons such as overcoming bias, ensuring access to highest level technical knowledge and to help fast track relationship and network building.

From the earliest stage, the Octava Foundation identified a need to build a strong foundation by taking time and making an effort to acquaint itself with the current context of EdTech in South-East Asia. This was reflected in the first pillar of the OSIC Theory of Change which committed to take steps to “ensure sophisticated, contemporary understanding of how educational disadvantage, extreme poverty and technology access intersect’. This is in keeping with much of the literature, which can be encapsulated in the quote “making big bets to tackle a problem without first immersing yourself in

understanding what is holding it in place is a recipe for disaster.”¹ Similarly, “…applying the systems lens early on appears to be one of the main factors for fostering success in effective and sustainable scaling.”²

The Octava Foundation actualized this thinking in various forms. An early investment in the educational consultancy firm Better Purpose³ produced a White Paper dedicated to researching opportunities for EdTech development and investment SE Asia. This brought immediate benefit by not only collating detailed, ‘best available’ data, but also helping ‘launch’ the Foundation as an organization willing to invest in knowledge development.

The Foundation also drew in a cross-section of people active across the EdTech start-up landscape, helping ensure high quality input and support in terms of best framing the Challenge. This ‘program infrastructure’ of knowledge investment and ‘network development’ as Support Program add-ons to ‘prize philanthropy’ were greatly valued by program participants, in terms of strengthening their own understanding of the landscape they were working upon, as well as introduction and exposure within networks capable of progressing their initiative.

It’s a long game! Showing a grantee that you are in it for the long haul helps both sides create transparency.⁴

It is observed that stronger approaches to Prize Philanthropy tend to exist within the framework of a clear, long-term commitment by the funder to engage the space they are entering. By securing longer term goals, the funder is helping the grantee visualize what a potential relationship and pathway to success might look like.

The Foundation’s investment in the White Paper and the quality of the ‘design, promotion and selection’ process gave applicants confidence that the Foundation was a genuine and credible entrant on the EdTech landscape. While the Prize on offer was only for a twelve-month period, there was a clear desire across the community of people involved with OSIC that the Foundation move forward with further funding opportunities, and also that the Foundation would take further steps to consolidate the network that was being established.

While there was confidence that further opportunities would be made available by the Foundation, there was some frustration amongst participants that the medium-term direction of the Foundation was uncertain. At the same time, there was respect for the idea of the Foundation wanting to pause, reflect and learn. This is consistent with the concept that while it is important to be clear on your goal (addressing acute educational disadvantage), it is important to be willing to adapt to optimize your chances of achieving that goal.

Too many Challenges operate using opaque processes, refrain from publishing what they learn, and find it hard to work together with other funders, even when addressing global problems far too big for any single foundation to tackle alone.⁵

Another common theme of literature around Prize Philanthropy is that a key indicator of better- quality processes is the proactivity of the philanthropist in building networks, valuing the input of others and their willingness to contribute to and leverage the concept of a community of practice around the subject they’re aiming to affect.

The Octava Foundation – with the support of MIT Solve - invested heavily in establishing a support network to guide a challenge design, promotion and selection process appropriate to supporting early-stage innovators. Representatives from civil society, development agencies and start-up financiers were all assembled to provide different points of view regarding the challenge approach. They were all also encouraged to continue to be available to the ‘semi-structured ecosystem supporting a regional portfolio of vibrant, effective innovators’, a longer-term objective set by the Foundation within its program logic.

Staff and leadership of the Foundation were refreshingly clear-sighted in terms of their understanding of the complexity of the challenge posed, and that they needed external support to succeed. There was also recognition that entrenched, often structural challenges thwarted efforts to meaningfully reach those at the ‘bottom of the pyramid’, which again dictated the need for a multi- skilled network of support – both to the Foundation itself but more importantly, to the organizations that it funded.

From the outside, people interested in EdTech perceived strong levels of awareness within the Foundation that solutions needed to be thorough, tested and realistic in their capacity to address the key pillars of disadvantage – accessibility, availability, affordability and quality. People also welcomed the Foundation’s openness to the fact that ‘silver bullets’ don’t exist. Perhaps most importantly, the Foundation accepted that it had a steep learning curve ahead, and that year one would primarily be a matter of building clarity about where and how best they fit into the eco-system aiming to address acute educational disadvantage. This unusual level of organizational self-awareness was welcomed by longstanding EdTech professionals and also the supported organizations themselves. It was also of tangible value to supported organizations were provided access to a breadth of different types of support that married well with their emergent needs.

Despite the relevance of the network convened, there are two cohorts that are not yet adequately integrated within the Foundation landscape if public education systems are to be an area of focus. There is a need for greater focus aimed at securing more active input from education ministries of the region. There is also a need to ensure access to pedagogical expertise that is focused on the importance of supporting change within poor government schools.

Prize philanthropy encourages individuals and groups to think creatively and develop innovative solutions to problems that may not have been adequately addressed through traditional methods. It promotes out-of-the-box thinking and encourages experimentation.

Prize Philanthropy’s value is seen in its capacity to motivate innovation by fostering competition and mobilizing diverse ideas and talent. Better Prize Philanthropy approaches foster collaboration among different stakeholders, including participants, financiers and governments, as they work together to address complex challenges.

The OSIC mobilized a wide range of participants proposing a diverse range of solutions with the potential to unleash novel and effective strategies for addressing educational disadvantage. Through the ‘Support Program’ that the Foundation, with support of MIT, put in place, participant capacity was strengthened in multiple ways including leadership, management and their access to new and important networks.

The diversity of applicants both in terms of their areas of geographic focus, educational discipline and technological concept provided the Foundation with a broad range of different approaches that were informative in helping the Foundation itself better understand how it might best contribute in the medium to longer term.

Importantly, surveying of participants highlighted that without exception, all participants felt that they had organizationally developed, were clearer in terms of their pathway forward, and valued their participation in the networks fostered by the Octava Foundation and MIT. Participants also spoke of tangible capacity advances in terms of leadership capability, their ability to effectively engage networks and promote their innovation, and technical strengthening of their approach to meet market demands. All hoped that they would maintain a relationship with the Foundation, irrespective of whether further funding was available.

This highlights that the OSIC was effective in helping foster and progress the innovations inherent within each of the participants. The Prize Philanthropy approach, accompanied by a considered Support Program, was critical in responding to participant needs, but also in terms of further defining the Octava Foundation’s ‘sweet spot’ as a smaller philanthropic working to address the complex challenge of improving opportunities for those at the ‘bottom of the socio-economic pyramid’ in Southeast Asia.

Lessons learned through OSIC

As indicated, the overall process of the Octava Foundation Social Innovation Challenge has been significant in terms of progressing the understanding, needs and focus of both the Challenge participants and the Foundation itself.

While still recognizing public system engagement and systemic change as critical, the Foundation has better understanding of the highly complex challenge that presents, and also the innate tension that exists between much that goes under the ‘EdTech’ banner and public system engagement. Currently, public systems are simply not in the marketplace to buy EdTech solutions – for myriad reasons. This is of profound significance in terms of how the Foundation will proceed given the centrality with which it views public systems as critical in reaching those at the ‘bottom of the pyramid’.

The sheer scale and effort required to affect meaningful systemic change was also made clear through the OSIC, demanding the Foundation reflect on how best it can contribute moving forward. Given its relatively limited resources, the Foundation sees future opportunity in being more niche, leveraging its nuanced understanding of some locations, and in more closely aligning itself to likeminded organizations with whom it can foster relationships that play to the complementary strengths of each coalition member.

Overall, RCG’s perspective is that the Octava Foundation’s decision to commit to a Prize Philanthropy approach augmented by a sophisticated and nuanced Support Program has proven effective in laying a strong broad-based foundation around knowledge gathered, networks developed and lessons learned. The result of this is that the Octava Foundation can now move forward with greater confidence, clarity of vision, and more realistic expectations in terms of what it can and can’t affect. The Foundation is now also very well placed to progress in step with a coalition of now familiar partners with whom it shares similar values and commitment to the challenge of impacting educational inequality.

1 Shaping successful scaling processes with public–private engagement, (2018), PPPLab Food & Water

2 Ibid.

3 Home | Better Purpose

4 finding, Funding, and Scaling, (2019), Stanford Social Innovation Review

5 finding, Funding, and Scaling, (2019), Stanford Social Innovation Review