Working with impact

Why is working with impact important for the Fund?

SG: ‘Giving impact management and research a more central place in our policy provides us with a better understanding of what projects deliver. This helps us to determine whether the set of tools and the deployment of resources are aligned with the Fund’s objectives. It also helps us to respond better to the dynamics of the sector and society. Thinking differently about result within the sector, putting words to it, and identifying it better, means that we can take projects further. The intention of our impact research is not to measure effect, but to gain insight in order to learn, improve and be better accountable. Not only towards our clients and financiers – the ministries – but also, in particular, towards our applicants, the design field and stakeholders in other sectors.’

Lisa, could you outline the development of the Fund’s policy in recent years with regard to working with impact?

LW: ‘We started by making “theories of change” and carried out impact research on a number of projects and programmes. This has shown clearly what works and what doesn’t, for ourselves and especially for our applicants. It has also provided insight into how we can utilise communication and networking activities – in support of awarding grants – to increase impact. In this way, an impact strategy has gradually emerged for the Fund as a whole.

Ultimately, we want the support we provide to contribute to the development of the fields of design, architecture and digital culture. We also want to ensure that design can play a greater role in addressing societal challenges. The makers and organisations we support all do so in their own way, together with or via different types of partners, participants, peers, users or visitors. That is why we as a Fund focus on collaboration between makers and parties within or outside the creative industry, we provide free space for practice development, research and experimentation, and we enable presentations about design (and knowledge about design). Including in an international context.

That is the story – the theory. The other part of the strategy revolves around how we research that theory and how we use insights from that research to learn, inspire others or offer insight, and hopefully strengthen the impact of supported projects. Impact management therefore not only involves carrying out research during and after a project by applicants; you also have to be astute about the data you collect and the communication strategy you have as Fund, for example. Consequently, we started weaving working with impact into the organisation – and that process is ongoing.’

How does working with impact take on a tangible form for applicants?

LW: ‘The field we support works in a very impact-driven way. But the level at which impact is made varies and it is not always specifically put into words. To get a good picture, at the Fund we determine for each programme or grant scheme whether and in what way we will investigate and try to strengthen the impact. So we do not have a one-size-fits-all approach. It depends on the specific theory of change, but especially on the type of applicant, and the duration and size of a grant.

From 2025, some applicants who have been supported through the Design, Architecture or Digital Culture grant schemes will find some questions about the impact of their project on their accountability form. Other applicants, supported through the Creative Industries Kick-start Grant Scheme, may receive an invitation from us to have a reflective discussion with us a few months after their project has ended. Each year, we also approach various applicants to create a video portrait, to visualize and share the impact of their project and to show what we do as a Fund.

But there are also other ways in which we explore and try to strengthen impact. Within the Spatial Design Action Programme, we are doing this more intensively. In this context, project partners meet regularly under the guidance of the process supervisor of the relevant open call. During the course of these projects, which last about three years, we carry out a short survey twice to see what effects are or are not being realised. And two years after completion, we conduct another interview to determine what the impact has been. We also base the communication strategy on the theory of change and insights from the research.

So, applicants either notice little or nothing of our working with impact, or they are clearly involved. In any case, what is always an important aim of the research is to identify the effects on applicants themselves (and on their practice), as well as on their partners, participants, users or visitors, and determine how these do or do not come about. This sometimes involves a long haul; it often takes a considerable length of time before it is clear what a project or collaboration has brought about.’

You also talk about a modified accountability form. Can you explain further how the Fund currently handles accountability?

LW: ‘Reporting on accountability is a logical moment to allow applicants to reflect on the impact of their work. Everyone has to submit an accountability report and the form is already available. However, from this year we are taking a different approach. In fact, being able to carry out impact research was not our only ambition. We also wanted to make providing accountability an easier process for applicants and to work more from a position of trust. This means that at present we do not ask applicants with grants of up to € 10,000 for accountability. For projects with higher grant amounts, we do – but the number of questions and required attachments have been greatly reduced. This set-up leaves more room for applicants and ourselves to carry out research (including impact research) and make results visible in other ways and at other times.'

Syb, what steps are to be taken in the coming years?

SG: ‘In our 2025-2028 policy plan, we have given a clear place to working with impact. In fact, it is the first Change we name: a new narrative for societal impact. We are going to intensify working with impact so that we can demonstrate even better what the added value of our activities is for society. We want insights from impact research to reach the right audience on time, in the right form. These are our applicants, but also our collaboration partners and clients. We are already working with a model that allows us to clarify in which impact areas we link grant schemes to objectives, target groups and result. That link between our set of tools and the impact strategy will only get stronger.’

Podcast impact and financing

Would you like to know more about how and why the Fund is working with impact? Listen to the episode of Agendapunt, the Boekman Foundation’s podcast on impact and financing (in Dutch). Besides Lisa Wolters, you can hear Margriet van Diggelen (VSBfonds), Martijn Blom (Impact Europe) and Nina Pigaht (Cultural Participation Fund).