BEF’s approach to funding watershed restoration groups departs significantly from the traditional grantee-grantor funding model.  We recognized early on that building real relationships with our grantees—by committing ourselves and our support to the long-term goals of our partners—would be necessary if we sincerely expected our funding and support to achieve measurable ecological results on the ground.

We found that when we awarded short-term grants, our grantees typically a) lacked both the incentive and support necessary to assess the real effects of their on-the-ground investments; b) felt compelled to report project “success” because they ultimately wanted to be eligible for future funding; and c) fell victim to a vicious cycle in which they implemented projects, reported success, and moved on to the next grant without incorporating a learning and adaptation cycle.

In an effort to provide continuity and focus, BEF launched the Model Watershed program, and began to make long-term commitments to work with grantees to build and sustain integrated restoration strategies.  In doing this, we opened the door to building real trust and relationships with our partners.

Prior to the Model Watershed program, BEF grantees had been accustomed to an “arm’s length” relationship with funders, where at most they reported on the outcome of a single project.   We found that groups were not accustomed to working with a grantor to regularly assess progress towards meeting comprehensive and long-term restoration goals—and they were certainly not accustomed to discussing with a funder what program adaptations might be needed to achieve the greatest ecological impact.

We sincerely believe that in all cases local groups and their stakeholders must make decisions about local program implementation, however we have seen great value in establishing long-term working relationships with our partners.  Because of these relationships we can openly discuss past progress (or shortcomings!) and the need for future course corrections.

As trust builds, we become privy to the myriad real challenges that hinder ecological restoration.   Understanding the real challenges (political, economic, social, logistical) is daunting at times, but unless we roll up our sleeves and commit to solving these challenges, many community-based watershed groups will fail to achieve their objectives.   There is a fine line between challenging and supporting our partners, but in the best cases our partners come to rely on us as a committed partner that has a vested interest in helping them achieve their long-term goals.

– Todd Reeve

One of the hallmarks of BEF’s Model Watershed approach to funding is that we provide ten years of financial and technical support – but why ten years? For us, it’s more than just a nice, round number. It’s recognition that comprehensive restoration is a complex challenge that can take years, if not decades to address. It’s a commitment to our grantees to support them through the natural cycles of challenge and change that are inherent in their work. It’s a place to start. It’s also a bit of an experiment.

When BEF began the Model Watershed program, we were interested in testing the idea that providing longer term funding would help give our grantees the stability and flexibility to take a more comprehensive approach to their ecological restoration work. We hoped that committing to a ten year partnership would allow and encourage them to do the thorough planning, prioritizing, strategic implementation, monitoring, and adaptive management that is harder to accomplish during shorter-term grant cycles, or with less flexible funding.

While we are continually learning from the Model Watershed experience, we are finding that making a longer-term commitment has been beneficial for our grantees. We’ve heard from them that the ten year commitment has allowed them to think more strategically about what they’re trying to accomplish and act more deliberately to achieve their restoration goals. Some have mentioned that becoming a Model Watershed partner has boosted organizational morale and helped them retain valuable, experienced staff, while others have noted the value of being able to leverage BEF’s longer-term commitment with other funding sources.

This feedback, and the ecological gains our partners are making in their watersheds are encouraging signs that the Model Watershed commitment is providing a new kind of benefit to our partners – and perhaps helping move us all one step closer to achieving lasting ecological improvement.

– Alden Boetsch