Spring 2003

What We've Learned
What's in a (Human Rights) Mission?

by Mark Lindberg, senior program officer, Otto Bremer Foundation

Last summer, the Otto Bremer Foundation board and staff held an annual planning retreat where we planned, among other things, to reflect on what we had learned about our human rights-focused mission statement since adopting it two years earlier. To prepare for the retreat, trustees and program officers paired off to interview six grantees, in order to learn what these trusted colleagues knew about our mission statement and how it related to their respective endeavors.

Guess what? Not one of the six people interviewed knew what our mission statement was. At the retreat, we reported the results with a little laughter and a little pain. On the lighter side, we learned that we couldn't take ourselves too seriously when not one of our friends knew our most-valued statement. On the other hand, did this lack of familiarity mean, despite hours of crafting and honing, that our beloved mission statement was destined for the foundation junkyard — just as we had finally memorized it?

Thankfully, no. As it turned out, nearly all of our pre-retreat interviews indicated that people have a strong sense about the kinds of things we fund, including programs that advocate for change or address underlying problems related to social and economic justice. But it was clear that we needed to focus on both what and how we were communicating to the public.

For the record, the foundation's mission is "to promote human rights and create opportunities for social and economic justice." If the public wasn't relating to this statement as much as we had hoped or thought, where did that leave us? Since that moment of truth, we have given much thought to that question. We have made some progress on clarifying what we mean when we talk about human rights, and determining how best to use a rights-based mission statement.

Human rights are the rights that a person has simply because he or she is a human being. Human rights seek to ensure the dignity of every person, and are typically described as inalienable, universal, interconnected and indivisible. Simply stated, rights can't be bought, sold or inherited; they are the same for all people, regardless of their background; they cannot be taken away (even when they are not upheld); and all humans are entitled to freedom, security and decent standards of living concurrently. They are cited, in one form or another, in nearly every major religious text, and many are captured in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The essential human rights document of the 20th century is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Adopted in 1948 by 58 nations, including the United States, it sets forth a variety of rights that correspond with five categories: civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. Examples of the rights enumerated in the Universal Declaration include the rights to housing and shelter, health care, work, education and a reasonable standard of living. As it happens, the Otto Bremer Foundation has, for many years, made grants in these and related areas. The Universal Declaration has become a kind of touchstone for the foundation's grantmaking activities.

As for applicants (and foundations), it is fair to say that many assume the "human rights" language in our mission and guidelines is simply not relevant to them — aren't human rights violations something that happens overseas? Nor are they necessarily familiar with framing their work in human rights language. In fact, the foundation's guidelines do not require applicants to cite the Universal Declaration in their proposals. We do, however, ask applicants to describe how their work relates to human rights, which allows us to learn more about rights-related issues in local communities. Some applicants expressly address their work in human rights terms and others do not.

Despite the inconsistent ways in which applicants use or view our mission statement, foundation staff and trustees are working hard at using the statement as a "lens" through which we view proposals. By doing this, the analysis shifts away from strict interpretations of language and toward an emphasis on the underlying principles and tenets of human rights. In other words, even if human rights are not expressly addressed by a program or in an application, we are constantly trying to learn how the underlying work may promote or protect human rights or enhance the dignity of those served.

This approach, known as a "rights-based" approach to grantmaking, helps to ensure we are investing in programs and projects that respect dignity, promote human rights and effect systemic change. Under a rights-based approach, typical questions asked during a grant review might include:

• Does this program safeguard human dignity (either as an end or in how the program is carried out)?

• Does this program seek to support those considered the most vulnerable in society or those whose rights are most threatened?

• Is this program accessible to all, especially to the marginalized sections of the population, in law, and in fact, without discrimination?

• Does the program ensure free, meaningful and effective participation by beneficiaries?

• Does the program identify benchmarks and indicators to ensure meaningful and measurable realization of rights (either directly or indirectly related to the proposal)?

In sorting through these and related questions, we can expect to work with organizations not because they provide services to those who are underserved or have had fewer opportunities in life, but rather because they provide services that enable people to claim the rights that are already theirs. GF

© Copyright 2003 Minnesota Council on Foundations
Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited.

Top