the prince claus fund - government.nl · tor terms of reference. ... the prince claus fund for...

the

Prince claus Fund

rePort oF the commission For the 2001-2005 mid-term evaluation

For culture and develoPment

The Prince Claus Fund’s Responseto the 2001–2005 Mid-Term EvaluationReport of theWellink Committee,October 2007

The committee responsible for the 2001–2005 mid-termevaluation of the Prince Claus Fund consisted of:Chairman:NoutWellink, President of Dutch Central BankMembers:Hedy d’Ancona, former Minister ofWelfare,Public Health and CultureRyclef Rienstra,Director of theVandenEnde FoundationBert van de Putte, Policy evaluatorSecretary:Flora van RegterenAltena

Hoge Nieuwstraat 302514 EL Den HaagTelephone 070.427.4303Telefax [email protected]

Prins Claus Fonds voorCultuur en Ontwikkeling

Prince Claus Fund forCulture and Development

Fondation Prince Claus pour laCulture et le Développement

Fundación Príncipe Claus para laCultura y el Desarrollo

General

The Evaluation Report is positive in its assessment of the Prince Claus Fund’s policy, functioningand results between the years 2001 and 2005.The Report appreciates not only the Fund’s workingmethod and program choices but also the helpful and open attitude of its staff. Moreover, itmentions the many beneficial effects of the Fund’s activities.

The Prince Claus Fund’s two new programs – the Network Partnership Program (2001–) and theCultural Emergency Response (2003–) – have received a positive review.The Fund’s finances werein order and have been managed effectively, and its chosen activities and themes were judgedto be relevant. In addition, the Committee expressed an interest in the development of a newand relevant function for the Fund that comprises the sharing of knowledge and the collectingof information.

The Report includes an analysis of the Fund’s policy and program, and indicates where its organi-sation can be improved.The Fund will continue to hone its working method and choices in orderto increase their effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability so that it will be able to realise itsobjectives more capably.The Fund will incorporate the Evaluation Committee’s recommendations.

Effectiveness

The definition of culture and developmentThe Committee appreciated the activities’ breadth and diversity, but felt that the definitionof culture and development had been too widely formulated. In response, the Fund argues thatopting for a broad basis actively provides an opening for those projects and activities that ten yearsago would have probably fallen between the two stools of the cultural sector and developmentorganisations.The Report’s general appreciation of the diversity of the Prince Claus Fund’sworking field strengthens the Fund’s resolve to maintain the necessary scope.

The Prince Claus Fund LibraryThe Committee expressed its concern about the limited range and distribution of the Prince ClausFund Library.This program’s priority is to focus on subjects of major cultural importance that wouldbe ignored without the Fund’s support. In addition, the Library’s distribution is aimed at specifictarget groups where the impact of this communication is profound rather than wide-ranging.

In essence, this program reveals the “black holes” in the international cultural discourse.With-out the Fund, these books would not be published.Talented authors and artists from the Fund’starget countries are given the opportunity not only to draw attention to unfamiliar subjects –such as Syrian Lingerie,Turkic Speaking Peoples and Political Cartoons – but also to create qualitypublications.Moreover, the Library reflects the Fund’s activities.Through book presentations andpress releases, the Fund and its publishers are also striving to highlight the factor of communication.In the future, the Fund will try to involve more publishers from its intended areas in this series.

2 The Prince Claus Fund’s Response to the 2001–2005 mid-term Evaluation Report


CommunicationIn terms of prominence, the Fund feels that it has achieved a reasonable level of recognitionboth at home and abroad.However, the Fund is concerned about the Dutch policy-makers’lack of attention for the field of culture and development; hence, this issue features prominentlyon its 2007 Netherlands agenda.The Fund devotes a great deal of energy to communicating withpolicy-makers,members of the Dutch parliament and other influential people.Although thisapproach has clearly yielded results, the field of culture and development is not the highest priorityhere, and certainly not amongst Dutch politicians.The recommendation for a more active anddirect involvement in debates on political and social issues will be complied with.Nonetheless,the Prince Claus Fund has already been stimulating these debates for many years throughthemes and subjects such as the Positive Results of Migration,Culture in Development Co-operation,Humour and Satire, and Culture as a Basic Need.

The Fund is sometimes considered elitist in the Netherlands.However, the cultural elite is ableto ensure that the Fund is taken seriously and can reach society at large. Elitism is not necessarilya negative concept. Moreover, the Fund actively aims at focusing on both elitist and popularculture so as to celebrate not only Bolivian Baroque music but also football in the slums of Nairobi.It supports everything from modern dance in Senegal to the carnival ofTrinidad.

The Fund considers itself to be reasonably well known in the mainstream cultural sector abroad.The Fund’s financial limitations naturally affect its ability to achieve worldwide recognition.However, it is important to emphasise the fact that the Fund strives to involve both people andorganisations in its existing infrastructure and network. Sometimes this means that people hadnever even heard of the Fund before they came into contact with it. Laureates, advisors andnominators are primarily sought in those areas where the Fund’s network is still somewhat limited.

The Committee was positive in its opinion of the Prince Claus Fund Journal.Here, the Fund considersthe Journal’s considerable mailing expenses to be an inevitable consequence of the many peoplein the Fund’s network who do not have their own Internet connection and must thereforedepend on costly Internet cafés.The Fund is well aware of the increasing digitalisation of infor-mation, and will develop a relevant policy in the near future.Newsletters have been launchedin 2007 for both the Cultural Emergency Response and the Network Partnership Program.

Efficiency

Programs and their effectsThe Fund is pleased with the program effects that were mentioned in the Report. Relevant andnew collaborations were acknowledged in terms of theAwards, and the increased potential ofcommunication and information exchange was appreciated concerning the Publications program.The Exchanges section explicitly describes how – following the Fund’s financial support – govern-ments have also been prepared to provide joint funding. In addition, the travel budget wasregarded as being an important and efficient means for achieving the Fund’s objectives.

Clearly, in the context of the Fund’s goals, effect measurement cannot be explained in purelyquantitative economic terms.Nonetheless, it makes obvious sense to gauge such long-termobjectives as the stimulation of democratisation processes, socio-economic “welfare” and theeffectiveness of procedures.The Fund will continue to analyse and evaluate its aims and activities.

Sustainability

The Fund greatly emphasises the importance of content-based dialogue. In addition, it is activein not only the national but also the international field of culture and development.Achievingthis involves making major demands on the Fund’s staff along with a high level of labour intensivework.The Committee recognised this.Although it agreed with the deployment of an overheadpercentage of 20%, it would have preferred a target percentage of approximately 15%.However,the Fund regards this percentage as being unfeasible. Bearing in mind that the new plans topromote the sharing of information and knowledge would be included amongst the Fund’s tasksalong with the expansion of communication potential and political lobbying, the Fund thereforewishes to retain the agreed maximum overhead of 20%.However, it goes without saying thatthe Fund will do everything in its power to avoid drawing on this margin.

In relation to the CER program, the Committee described the necessity and potential forincreasing CER’s political and financial support.The Fund underlines this obligation,which it willstrive to achieve.

Recommendations

The Fund has drawn up the following responses to the Committee’s recommendation summary,which is included in the back of the Report.The first response primarily concerns the Fund’sconcept of sustainability, as mentioned above.The Fund concurs with the Committee’s initial recommendation to increase its continuity andsustainability.The Fund also underscores the recommendation for the timely deployment andcontinuation of the ten-year dispensation.Moreover, it shares the Committee’s opinion thata combination of continuity and autonomy must be achieved.The Fund’s basis in Dutch societyand politics is vital for its prolonged existence.Obviously, it will also continue to seek thecommitment of additional funding bodies.

The Fund and its relations with national andinternational institutes and organisationsThe Fund regards its co-operation with development and international organisations as beingan essential part of its raison d’être.These organisations are important partners for the Fund.However, it is vital that the Fund should remain aware of the fact that, despite being financiallypowerful, development organisations do not define culture as a basic need.The Fund viewsits role as primarily that of an advisor, inspirer and driving force within the field of culture and



development.Here, the message is: culture is a basic need; take culture seriously; pay attentionto culture and associate it with development.The Fund would like international developmentorganisations to place a greater emphasis on culture; it also hopes that Dutch cultural instituteswill provide a higher level of international perspective.

There is regular co-operation with international organisations such as theWorld MonumentFund (WMF), the International Council of Museums (ICOM) and the Ford Foundation.This willbe intensified in the future.The Fund plans to reinforce its network by increasingly targetingand communicating with development organisations both at home and abroad. Its objectivesare based on trust and respect, quality and originality: values that are essential to the relevanceand objectives of development.

The Prince Claus Fund subscribes to the Committee’s opinion that, through its focus andworking method, it has managed to find its own niche in the world of culture and development.The Fund conducts pioneering work in a global field that still largely consists of virgin territory.In this process, culture is regarded as a basic human need, and it is on this basis that the Funddevelops its programs, activities and position.

The mutual solidarity and dependence of countries, regions, peoples, communities and individualsmean that culturally we can no longer isolate ourselves.A knowledge of other cultures is neededfor the creation of a peaceful society. Knowledge and understanding protect us from prejudiceand its attendant emotion of hatred.Apart its sheer necessity, the experiencing of other culturesalso enriches our existence.New visions of beauty inspire us; other insights and ways of thinkingstrengthen our knowledge and expand our view of the world. It is also important that cultureis supported on both a national and international level because it enables the discussion ofsubjects that would otherwise remain hidden. Post-war and post-disaster situations benefit fromcultural depiction, critical analyses and the representation of what actually happened.Cultureprovides people with a place in the world, an idea of who they are and a positive self-awareness:it imbues them with hope, respect and identity.

Commissioned by:

Report of the Commission for the 2001-2005 Mid-term Evaluation

Table of ConTenTs

1. introduction 5

2. method of evaluation 6

3. the Prince claus Fund 8

4. Findings 12

4.1. The 2001 Evaluation 12

4.2. Programmes and Approach 12

4.2.1. Awards 13

4.2.2. Publications 16

4.2.3. Exchange and Activities 18

4.2.4. Network Collaboration 22

4.2.5. Cultural Emergency Response 23

4.3. Financial management 24

4.4. Organisation 27

4.5. Positioning and communication 28

5. conclusions and recommendations 32

5.1. Effectiveness 32

5.1.1. Culture and development 32

5.1.2. The programmes 32

5.1.3. Programme cohesion 35

5.1.4. Communication 35

5.1.5. Positioning of the Fund 36

5.2. Efficiency 36

5.3. Sustainability 38

5.4. Recommendations 39

The Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development

4

lisT of Used abbreviaTions

BAK Basis voor Actuele Kunst [Basis for Contemporary Art]CBF Central Fundraising Bureau [Centraal Bureau Fondsenwerving]CER Cultural Emergency Response ProgrammeC&O Culture and Development [Cultuur en Ontwikkeling]DAC country A DAC country is a country that appears on the ODA list (recipients of

“Official Development Assistance”), compiled by the Development Committee of the OECD FTE Fulltime equivalentKIT Royal Tropical Institute [Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen]ICCO Interchurch Organisation for Development Co-operationICBS International Council of the Blue ShieldISIM International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern WorldNCDO Netherlands Commission for Sustainable Development

[Nederlandse Commissie voor Duurzame Ontwikkeling]OECD / DAC Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)PCF Prince Claus FundPR Public RelationsSNV Netherlands Volunteer Foundation, a development organisation

[Stichting Nederlandse Vrijwilligers]ToR Terms of Reference

Report of the Commission for the 2001-2005 Mid-term Evaluation 5

The Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development, established in 1996 on the occasion of the 70th birthday of Prince Claus, seeks to increase the understanding of cultures and promote the interaction between culture and development. The Fund stimulates and initiates debates, creative processes, and artistic productions, as a platform for intercultural exchange. In cooperation with persons and organisations from Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean in particular, the Fund realises activities and publications that contribute to a positive interaction between culture and development. The Fund has an annual budget of around € 4 million and, although largely funded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with an annual contribution of € 3.4 million, enjoys a position of independence. The Fund also receives support from the National Postal Code Lottery and others.

In 2006 the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development celebrated its tenth anniversary: a moment to celebrate and publicise the more than one thousand projects realised in more than one hundred countries, but simultaneously a moment to look back and take stock.

The Prince Claus Fund was first evaluated in 2000/2001, four years after the start-up of the Fund. At the end of its evaluation, the first evaluation commission recommended to the government that the Prince Claus Fund be continued and the available funds increased. It further recommended that the government arrange for a periodic, independent evaluation1. On the basis of this evaluation, the Minister of Development Cooperation decided to increase the financing for the Fund and to continue it for a period of ten years. The subsidy decision for the period of 2002-2011 of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stipulated that a mid-term evaluation of the Prince Claus Fund would be carried out in 2007.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Fund set up an independent evaluation commission for the evaluation, of which the following persons have become members: Nout Wellink (chair), president of De Nederlandsche Bank (Dutch Central Bank); Hedy d’Ancona, former minister of Welfare, Public Health, and Culture; Ryclef Rienstra, director of the VandenEnde Foundation; Bert van de Putte, policy evaluator. The commission was supported by Flora van Regteren Altena, secretary.

1 inTrodUCTion

1. Nuis Evaluation Commission, evaluation of the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development, 2000, pg. 35.

The Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development6

2 MeThod of evalUaTion

The evaluation commission received instructions to assess the policy and activities of the Fund based on the goals as articulated in the 1996 Statutes, the 1997 Policy Plan, and the 2001 Vision for the Future. In addition to potential evaluation items, such as the realisation of policy, the profile, the network, financial implementation, and organisation, attention was requested for the activities that the Fund developed in the framework of continuing and stimulating its support base in the Netherlands for its goals and activities. The evaluation concerns the period from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2005; where relevant, developments in 2006 are also included.

The evaluation takes the form of a mid-term review. The emphasis is on inventorying and evaluating the activities of the Fund and the manner in which the Fund has shaped and managed these activities. Upon the explicit request of the commissioning parties, the evaluation commission limited itself to the outlines of the policy pursued and its practical implementation. Also in consultation with the commissioning parties, it was decided that limited attention would be paid to the effects that the Prince Claus Fund has achieved with its activities. No investigation has taken place in the countries where the Fund supports activities. Interviewees were however asked about their perception of the achieved effects.

The investigation also focused on the choices made by the Fund in order to fulfil its goals. The choices were evaluated on a policy level, the implementation of the goals in the programmes, as well as on an operational level, which activities were honoured or not within programmes. In doing so, the types of approach with regard to the activities (active, passive-active, and passive) that the Fund utilises are also taken into consideration.

For the evaluation of the Prince Claus Fund, the commission first of all based its evaluation on the questions posed in the Terms of Reference. These questions however show some overlap. For the evaluation, the commission has reformulated the

questions in the ToR and linked them to the evaluation criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability:

effeCTiveness• Has the choice of programmes been effective and

what has been the result of the activities selected and undertaken within the programmes? Have they contributed to realising the goals of the Prince Claus Fund?

• What is the position of the Fund on a national and international level?

• Have the (communication) activities of the Fund contributed to maintaining and stimulating the support base in the Netherlands?

effiCienCy• Has the chosen administrative and organisational

structure of the Fund worked to the satisfaction of various parties involved?

sUsTainabiliTy • Is the current funding from the government, which is

now being supplemented by at least one sponsor, a risk or indeed a strength?

It should be noted that the interpretation of the concepts of effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability as contained in the questions in the Terms of Reference, differs somewhat from the definitions of these concepts as articulated by the OECD/DAC. This interpretation is, however, in line with the limited attention for inventorying the achieved effects as mentioned previously.

In examining the implementation of the policy of the Prince Claus Fund, the evaluation commission made use of the written documents of the Fund, annual reports, several publications of the Fund, the database with information about projects, several websites, and other publications.


In addition, the commission carried out written surveys among four groups of stakeholders:

• Laureates. A survey was sent to 26 laureates, of whom 7 could not be reached and of whom 11 filled in the survey.

• Beneficiaries. A survey was sent to 37 beneficiaries, of which 23 filled in the survey.

• Dutch embassies in countries within the area covered by the Fund; in total, a survey was sent to 63 embassies, of which 48 responded.

• The spokespersons for Culture from the Netherlands House of Representatives Commission on Education, Culture, and Sciences and the spokespersons for Development Cooperation from the House of Representatives Commission on Foreign Affairs. No House Members responded despite repeated requests.

In the Netherlands, discussions were held with the commissioning parties (the board of the Prince Claus

Fund and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs), organisations and funds that are active in the same or a related field, and political representatives. A number of independent international experts were interviewed by telephone.

In performing the evaluation, the commission encountered the following limitations:

• Although self-evaluations were received from the Cultural Emergency Response, Network Collaboration, and magazine policy programmes as well as an evaluation of the collaboration with the National Postal Code Lottery, no self-evaluation was received that covers the total work of the Fund, nor the short and critical self-analysis announced in the ToR.

• The database used by the Fund, introduced in the period under review, is only complete and reliable as of 2003. The possibilities for (electronic) data analysis turned out to be limited.


3 The PrinCe ClaUs fUnd

The complete name of the Fund, Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development, immediately indicates the purpose of the Fund. This is described in the Statutes as follows1:“The goal of the foundation is to expand the understanding

of cultures and promote the interaction between culture and development.” From the beginning, the idea has been to accomplish this goal through organising meetings among cultural agents, presenting awards, organising lectures, and supporting activities of persons who contribute to realising the goals of the foundation2.

In 2001, on the basis of the 1997 Policy Plan, a Vision for the Future was drafted which outlines the course for the period from 2002 to 2011. Whereas the 1997 Policy Plan indicated that no defined criteria would be employed to elaborate the goals, and that the Fund wanted to take on an open and flexible position, the Vision for the Future laid down clearer conditions (see below) by means of substantive criteria for cooperation or support. The openness and flexibility were maintained.

The Vision for the Future also pays more attention to the Fund as a network organisation with funds. It supports organisations and persons that pursue similar goals and carries out activities together with them. It also brings them into contact with one another or with other organisations from the network. The network is also invited to contribute work content to the Fund and follow it critically. Based on the experiences of the first three years, the activities of the Fund were approached in two ways:

• active approach: The fund has an initiating and supervisory function;

• Passive approach: Merely financial support. A mixed form of these two approaches was also distinguished:

• Passive-active approach: The fund has an advisory and mediating function in addition to a supporting function;

In the Vision for the Future, points for attention with regard to content are identified to enhance the

charisma and effectiveness of the Fund: • values: Trust and respect. Collaboration occurs on

the basis of equality and reciprocity, including an open exchange of opinions and critique.

• criteria: Quality, originality, and commitment. Quality and originality or innovation must be a condition for cooperation, and it also ought to project a positive image in society.

• Priority: Amnesty for Culture. The Fund wishes to support people who encounter political or social obstacles in their work in the area of culture and development.

The goals and strategy of the Fund are outlined as follows in the 2005 annual plan:

“The Prince Claus Fund seeks to increase the understanding of cultures and promote the interaction between culture and development. The Fund considers the interaction between culture and development as the recognition of the integral role of culture in development processes. The Fund takes the view that culture is one of the basic needs of the human being.”

The Prince Claus Fund is a platform for intercultural exchange. In cooperation with persons and organisations in particular in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean, the Fund realises contemporary activities and publications in the area of culture and development. The Prince Claus Awards form a part of this policy.

The Fund elects to:• Honour “exceptionality” on the basis of respect and trust.• Honour small and innovative initiatives. This in principle

does not concern established names but specifically people who are still fully experimenting, and for whom financial support, protection, and appreciation are of great significance.

• Support individuals and informal groups. Support is not necessarily attached to one project or an organisation.

• Appreciate the intellectual debate about culture and development. Its influence is perhaps not directly demonstrable but can have an effect in the longer term.

• Stimulate intercultural exchange that is achieved in an innovative manner.

• Reward a committed attitude in a world where the

1. Statutes of the Prince Claus Fund Foundation for Culture and Development, 6 September 1996, Article 2.1.2. Idem, Article 2.2.


courage to do so is not always present. The Fund seeks to offer support and recognition to those who are eligible, regardless of the difficult circumstances under which that sometimes occurs.

• Adopt a passive and active attitude vis-à-vis its partners. This means that the Fund is a supporter, protector, and observer, as well as an initiator and an agent.”1

The goals defined in the policy plans were further elaborated by introducing various central themes over the years, which enhance the cohesion among the different programmes. This concerns the following themes:

• Zones of Silence: the locating and opening areas of cultural silence;

• Creating Spaces of Freedom: the creation of cultural sanctuaries;

• Beauty in Context: the analysis of beauty in different cultural environments;

• Living Together: the art of co-existence.

Sub-themes were also formulated which have been utilised in the granting of the awards. These are, in order by year, The Art of African Fashion (1999), Urban Heroes (2000), Carnival (2001), Languages and Trans-Cultural Forms of Expression (2002), The Survival and Innovation of Crafts (as a sub-theme within Beauty in Context) (2003), Truth and Reconciliation (sub-theme of Living Together), The Positive Results of Asylum and Migration (sub-theme of Living Together) (2004), and Humour and Satire (sub-theme of Creating Spaces of Freedom) (2005).

The Prince Claus Fund has adopted a broad concept of culture, which is reflected in the disciplines in which it is active: visual arts, music, theatre, dance, literature, media/journalism, audiovisual, architecture, cultural heritage (non-material and material), design, philosophy, photography, culture and development, and sports (since 2003).

Based on the 1997 Policy Plan, four programmes were developed: Awards, Publications, Exchanges, and Activities. The 2001 evaluation made suggestions with respect to the programmes and also their

mutual relationship, after which the programme descriptions were tightened up in the Vision for the Future. A proposal was also put forth to expand the existing activities by supporting networks. The Net-work Partnership Programme was set up to that end. In 2003 the Cultural Emergency Response (CER) programme was initiated in response to the war in Iraq and the subsequent theft of objects from museums and libraries.

fUndsIn the initial years following the start-up of the

Fund, it received a subsidy of fl. 5,000,000 (around € 2.25 million) from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Since 2002, the Prince Claus Fund received € 3.4 million annually from the ministry. In addition, the Fund has received contributions from the National Postal Code Lottery since 2002, with an annual contri-bution of € 500,000 since 2003. This concerns a multiple-year commitment (up to and including 2010) which, however, is not structural because the National Postal Code Lottery has agreed to grant an “amount exclusively determined by it” annually. Through cooperation with other funds, interest income from assets, and sponsorship in kind (e.g. hotel rooms during the awards ceremony), the Fund had income of around € 4 million annually at its disposal in 2001-2005. The agreement with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stipulated that a maximum of 20% may be spent on overhead costs. A further condition for the subsidy amongst others is that a positive annual audit report is submitted to the ministry.

In 2005 the cooperation between the National Postal Code Lottery and the Prince Claus Fund was evaluated from 2002 onward. The positive assessment of the cooperation by both parties resulted in an agreement between the Lottery and the Fund until 2011. In the evaluation, the National Postal Code Lottery indicates that: “Honouring the extra project The Sahel Opera is a confirmation that the relationship offers many more possibilities for the future for expansion and intensification.”

1. Annual Report 2005, pg. 9.


The Fund stated that, among others, by means of the National Postal Code Lottery contribution, it is able to raise more awareness in the Netherlands of its activities in the rest of the world. This can give the Fund more positive exposure in the Netherlands.

In 2005, a fundraising plan was drawn up for the period from 2006 to 2011 in order to attract more structural external funding. With a more generous budget, more activities can be funded. It can also serve to fortify and extend the financial and social support base, both on a national and international level. Other government agencies (besides the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and material sponsorship are being considered for additional external financing of the Fund itself. In addition, the Fund is looking for partners who can enhance projects substantively and financially, a formula with which experience has been gained in various collaborative frameworks, such as the DOEN Foundation [Stichting Doen] in the framework of Bolivian Baroque Music and the Mondriaan Foundation with regard to various Orientation trips. The intention is to interest companies to provide funds for specific emergencies in the context of the CER programme. The Fund will further explore the possibilities of bequests and donations, among others, by making information about the Fund available to civil-law notaries. The aim of the additional fundraising is to achieve expansion of the budget to as much as a total of € 5 million in 20111.

organisaTionThe Prince Claus Fund is a foundation of which the

operational duties are delegated to a director. Until his death in 2002, Prince Claus himself was honorary chairman of the board, a function that his two sons, Prince Friso and Prince Constantijn, took over as of 2003. In that year, general management and day-to-day management were combined into one board, which would be positioned at a slightly longer distance from the offices and the daily routine.

The director is in charge of daily management of the offices, where in 2001 nine staff (7 FTE) worked; in

2005 that number grew to 15 persons (13.1 FTE). The director is responsible for the Fund’s organi-sation, work content, and finances and reports to the board.

Profile/PosiTioningSince 2002 the Fund intensified its communications

policy. The contribution of the National Postal Code Lottery since 2002 created the financial space to establish an active communications policy in the Netherlands.

Media attention for the presentation of the Prince Claus Award has always been great, both in the Netherlands, as well as in the countries of origin of the laureates. Publicising the activities that take place elsewhere has been possible, for example, by performances of the beneficiaries in the Nether-lands. The Fund also raises awareness in the Netherlands through the annual award of the Prince Claus Fund Film Grant (€ 15,000) during the Rotterdam Film Festival.

For communications, the Fund makes increasingly intensive use of its website. In 2006 the site was visited by an average of 4,200 visitors per month. As of 2005 a database was also linked to the site, containing all projects from that year onward. The website The Power of Culture [De Kracht van Cultuur] (www.krachtvancultuur.nl) offers information about the Fund. This website, which first came under the administration of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and is now managed by the Nether-lands Commission for Sustainable Development (NCDO), also draws attention to culture and development. Besides the Prince Claus Fund, infor-mation from various other (Dutch) culture and development organisations can be found here. The regular newsletter is sent to 1,400 e-mail addresses and the site is accessed 400-600 times daily (in comparison: the NCDO site attracts 600-800 visitors a day).

CollaboraTion wiTh oTher organisaTionsBesides a large and active network worldwide, the

1. At the time of writing, the data regarding the results achieved on the basis of the Fundraising Plan in 2006 were not yet available.


Prince Claus Fund also collaborates in several fields with organisations in the Netherlands. On the one hand, these are cultural or scientific organisations or institutes such as the Mondriaan Foundation, Praemium Erasmianum, BAK (Basis for Contem-porary Art [Basis voor Actuele Kunst], Utrecht), ISIM (International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World), The Rotterdam International Film Festival, Netherlands institute for Southern Africa [Nederlands Instituut voor Zuidelijk Afrika], the Veerstichting, Poetry International, Institute of Social Studies, and on the other, funds that are specifically dedicated to the topic of culture and development, such as Hivos Culture Fund [Hivos Cultuurfonds] and DOEN Foundation [Stichting Doen], and organisations for development coordination such as Cordaid. The Fund has also collaborated with the NCDO.


4.1 The 2001 evalUaTionOf the recommendations of the evaluation commission

in 2001, a number concerned the professionalisation of the organisation and the application procedures. The procedures for selecting applications and nominating laureates were better established and are applied. The recommended internal evaluations were carried out for large events and for the Network Cooperation programme and CER. The collaboration with the National Postal Code Lottery is evaluated once every four years. The proposed revision of the organisational, managerial and administrative structure was implemented, albeit with a few differences in emphasis.

With regard to the recommendations relating to the programmes (Publications: support to magazines, clearer identity of Journal; not organising conferences abroad itself but supporting existing regional networks), several options were investigated and, also with some differences in emphasis, changes were implemented. The network idea obtained priority in the Fund’s Vision for the Future, in which it put itself forward as a network organisation and introduced a programme in that area. The recom-mendation to make the Fund and its activities more widely known in the countries of beneficiaries and in the Netherlands led to an intensified communications policy (see Section 4.5).

In response to the recommendation to discontinue the Prince Claus Fund Library, the Fund argued that this programme is in fact essential for documenting the results of debates in which the Fund makes clear what it stands for and what it wants to achieve. It also considered the recommendation to be in contradiction with another recommendation to enhance the communications of the Fund. It decided to continue the programme, and, on the basis of strict selection, only to publish a limited number of books per year, with an innovative approach and of high quality. An editorial board will choose future publications. In order to lighten the workload at the offices, an experienced external managing editor was

recruited who collaborates with renowned publishing houses with good distribution channels so that the books can be well distributed1. The Fund now collaborates with a second managing editor, who is also a publisher at an international publishing house. The current Editorial board sees the Library as necessary because it makes the work of the Fund visible in a non-cursory medium. The contribution of the Fund is crucial to making the publications possible. The Library is dependent upon the Fund because, without a marketing budget, it has access to a potentially interested audience and to free publicity through book discussions via the network of the Fund.

4.2 PrograMMes and aPProaChThe Prince Claus Fund has six programmes: Awards,

Publications, Exchanges, Activities, Network Partnerships, and the Cultural Emergency Response Programme. The first four programmes were developed based on the policy plan of 1997 in the period until 2001. In the period that this evaluation relates to (2001-2005), two new programmes were started.

• In the Network Partnership Programme, the Fund engages in three-year collaborations with effective and innovative organisations with which it has already worked.

• The Cultural Emergency Response Programme was established after the destruction of cultural heritage during the war in Iraq. The world had already had to look on powerlessly as the Taliban regime in Afghanistan destroyed the Buddha statues in the Bamiyan Valley. The Fund identified a need for quick support in emergency situations. None of the other cultural funds is active in this area.

aCTive and Passive fUndIn the Vision for the Future, a distinction is drawn

between an active approach, whereby the Fund initiates activities, and a passive approach, whereby it waits for requests for support from others. A combination of the two is also possible. As an active fund, the Fund distinguishes itself from other

1. General Board Meeting minutes, 18 May 2001.

4. findings


funds, especially in the sense that it takes on partial responsibility for the activities. This does, however, also have consequences for its own organisation, both in terms of the required skills of staff, as well as the size of the organisation (staff, advisors, and advisory commissions). This influences the level of overhead costs1.

The awards programme, a portion of the publication programme (production of an Awards Book, the Journal, and the PCF Library), the CER, and the initiation of exhibits, gatherings, and events (Sahel Opera) can be characterised as active involvement. Contributions to publications of third parties and the Exchange and Activities programmes, including the provision of travel budget largely entail a passive approach.

Engaging in Network Partnerships is half active and half passive.

The aim is to spend around half of expenditures on activities as a “passive fund,” the other portion on its own initiatives. (This is without taking into account the Sahel Opera and the Awards programme)2. This goal was achieved only in 2004 according to the data of the Fund3.

The Fund feels that the active approach is important as it enables the Fund to profile itself as an organisation that contributes on a substantive level. In doing so, the Fund intends to evolve into a “knowledge centre,” where the available expertise and experience gained may be shared with individuals and organisations in the Netherlands and abroad.

1. General Board Meeting minutes, 9 November 2001.2. Conversation with Els van der Plas, 28 August 2006, and note by Geerte Wachter, Prince Claus Fund.

3. Overview of expenditures 2001-2005, June 2006.4. This amount was changed as of the board resolution of 23-08-2002 in order to bring the principal award

and the additional awards a little closer together.

4.2.1 awardsThe awards programme draws the most attention both

in the Netherlands as well as internationally. It is intended to honour people or organisations that share the ideals of the Fund and that, in addition, can be a role model and source of inspiration to others. In addition to awards for exceptional initiatives that promote cultural diversity and quality (ten awards, a

maximum of € 20,000, as of 2002, € 25,0004), each year a principal award (initially US$ 100,000, as of 2000, € 100,000) is granted for exceptional accomplishments in the area of culture and development. No restrictions are imposed and no conditions are stipulated on the spending of the prize money, a principle originating from Prince Claus.

Project allocation: 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

graPhiC 4.1: disTribUTion of aCTive and Passive aPProaChes 2001-2005

64% 77% 64% 53% 63%

36% 23% 36% 47% 37%=Passive

=active


1. General Board Meeting minutes, 15 August 2005, and announcement of PCF in actual response to the evaluation report, 29 June 2007. 2. Board Meeting minutes, 27 August 2004, 25 February 2005.

The international jury (Prince Claus Award Commission) chooses the majority of laureates on the basis of a theme, which is set in consultation with the board. The themes for the awards were, in order by year: 2001: Building Bridges, Carnival 2002: Languages and intercultural forms of expression 2003: The future is handmade: The survival and innovation of crafts

2004: The positive results of asylum and migration 2005: Humour and satire

In principle, beneficiaries of the Fund are not eligible for an award in the year that they receive support for an activity1. The jury proposes nominees to the board, which determines the definitive list of laureates.

gender of laureates 2001-2005

organisaTions M 35

811

2001: summer carnival Foundation, rotterdam [stichting Zomercarnaval, rotterdam] and Peter minshall, trinidad: The summer Carnival, initiated by the antillean community, celebrates multicultural and international exchange in rotterdam. Peter Minshall renewed the appearance of Carnival worldwide as a designer of masked processions.2002: mohammed chafik, morocco: a writer and scholar, he has contributed to the recognition of the berber culture and language in Morocco and elsewhere.2003: Wang shixiang, china: as recognition of his precision research into popular culture and crafts in China.2004: mahmoud darwish, Palestine: Poet translated into 35 languages. founder and editor of the literary magazine al Karmel, which provides a platform for intercul-tural discussions about intellectual issues. 2005: Zapiro/Jonathan shapiro, south africa: his cartoons offer sharp criticism of social and political conditions within and outside of the region and are published in south african newspapers and in the international press.

Ten awards are presented annually in addition to the principal awards. In 2002 and 2004 these were nine. The Vision for the Future explicitly states that the nominations shall take account of the geographic distribution and as well as distribution over the various disciplines. The Fund itself has asked for more nominations from Africa, as well as more women and as of yet unknown people with exceptional qualities2. The number of female laureates is still limited (8 of the 54).

box 4.1: PrinCiPal award winners 2001-2005

f


The laureates are distributed over the regions of: Africa (15), Asia (22), Latin America1 (13), and Europe/elsewhere (4). An average of 5 laureates annually comes from countries that belong to the 50 least-developed countries. The others come from middle-income countries. Twice an award was presented to persons from high-income countries (the Netherlands and Israel).

The most controversial award was the principal award in 2004 for the Palestinian poet Mahmud Darwish. Besides critical articles in the press (e.g.Nieuw Israelitisch Weekblad), this award led to parliamentary questions from the SGP about his involvement with the PLO. The Prince Claus Fund stressed in this discussion that Darwish is a poet of global stature who always seeks dialogue and is an advocate of peace on the basis of two sovereign states.

award CereMonyWith the exception of the year 2002, the laureates are

already announced in October in order to create an extra publicity moment. In principle, the presentation of the principal award takes place in December in the presence of the Queen and members of the royal family. 2001 was the last time that Prince Claus himself presented the award. The last few years, the two honorary chairs have alternated in presenting the award. Each year an Awards Book is compiled with articles about the theme, the jury report, and an introduction of the laureates. The additional awards are usually presented by the Dutch ambassador in the country where the laureate resides. The Prince Claus Fund supports the embassies in the preparations for the award presentation.

The interest of the media in the presentation of the Prince Claus Award has always been great, both in the Netherlands, as well as in the countries of the laureates. In the Dutch media, small news reports, often accompanied by a photo, and longer background articles appear in the days before or after the presentation. In 2005 two extensive articles about the principal award winner and three about

three of the other laureates were published. The awards elsewhere also led to articles in the respective national media, sometimes in the international media. Sometimes laureates perform in the Netherlands: the Chinese pop star Cui Jian (2000 laureate) in the Melkweg in 2002; Bolivian Baroque Music (laureate in 2002) in the Concertgebouw in 2005; Ivaldo Bertazzo (choreographer and laureate 2004) performed in the framework of the Holland Dance Festival 2005. As of 2005, activities have been supported with publicity via newspaper advertise-ments, among others, in the context of the 2005 award winner, Zapiro. Upon occasion, a report was broadcasted about a laureate on Dutch television: Mathare Youth Sports Association, Zembla, Vara (2003), and choreographer Ivaldo Bertazzo, TV West (2005).

A survey among embassies revealed that almost half have collaborated with the Prince Claus Fund for the purpose of an awards ceremony. Almost 80% of the embassies are familiar with the laureates. The majority is positive about the choice of laureates. There is also appreciation for the international stimulus that the award gives to locally famous artists or initiatives, as well as for not following the beaten paths. The choice for the theme “humour and satire” with a cartoonist as principal award winner gained resonance because of the interest of the cartoon as a medium of communication in parts of Africa, also zfor socially relevant topics. It thereby also reaches a large group of young people. Appreciation has also been expressed for granting an award to persons who make an effort for culture of marginalised populations and for promoting their cultural identity. A number of embassies indicate that they make valuable contacts with laureates or partners of the Fund. Two respondents point out that the Fund ought to make sure not to grant the award to artists who have already received recognition for their work on multiple occasions.

Those who have been present at the awards ceremony as an annually recurring event perceive it very positively: it is well organised and carefully prepared;

1. Including Caribbean


it is of quality and offers excellent (national and international) networking opportunities. It is a wonderful opportunity for putting the spotlight on art and artists in the framework of culture and development, as well as the Fund. The presence of the Royal Family lends the gathering extra prestige. A couple of the respondents wonder if the award is not too exclusive or whether the same people are not there too often.

effeCTs of granTing The awardsThe written survey among the laureates shows that

the majority of the laureates hardly knew or did not know at all of the Prince Claus Fund prior to receiving the award. The recipients stress the non-material aspects as an effect of the award, more than the amount of money attached to the award. The award generally means recognition and more respect, also with the national media. One laureate indicated that the award also shows her compatriots that, although she criticises the West, she is respected in the West also (or anyway).

The laureates are especially positive about the way in which the Fund seeks to support them. Many of the laureates join the Fund’s network after receipt of their award, sometimes as advisors on one of the commissions. Projects are also set up with laureates, or it results in a Network Partnership being started up (Mathare Youth Sport Association; Bolivian Baroque Music; Utan Kaya). Laureates who subsequently submit an application to the Fund are, however, not guaranteed approval: Of approximately 20 applications of laureates, 7 were rejected. Only 1 award winner says that he is no longer in contact with the Fund (after one year).

4.2.2 PUbliCaTionsThe Fund finances 5 types of publications: the Fund’s

magazine (the “Journal”); contributions to publications that are submitted as a request, Award Books, the Prince Claus Fund Library, and its own editions such as an anniversary agenda. The distribution of the publications budget, as of 2003 approximately € 500,000 annually over the various types of publications is as follows:

year Journal (per 2 editions) requests of third parties awards book PCf library PCf activity Total

2000 542001 216 27 61 10 3142002 75 151 30 15 2712003 181 33

2702484

2004 90 368 45 5182005 90 301 45 35 471

1. The amount for the Library was allocated in 2001 but in replacement of an activity from 1999.2. In 2003, € 300,000 was allocated to the Library, but the remaining amount from the allocation from 2001 (see previous footnote) was reduced by € 30,000.

Table 4.1: disTribUTion of PUbliCaTion Budget (allocations) (x € 1,000)

The activities that are supported at the expense of the Publication budget are distributed over the various disciplines. Culture and development (17), literature

(21), and media/journalism (14) are hereby most represented.


JoUrnalThe goal of the Prince Claus Fund Journal is to keep a

large and broad readership informed of the activities of the Fund and the various themes that the Fund is exploring. The intention is to publish the Journal twice annually. Broad distribution among interested parties worldwide is sought with circulation of 6,000 copies. In the period from 2001 to 2005, contrary to the planned ten, only six Journals were published; this is partly due to the website taking over the general reporting on activities of the Fund. The Journal therefore focused more on themes. (See Box 4.2) The expected Journals in 2005 did not appear until the following years.

effeCTs of PUbliCaTion of The JoUrnalRespondents indicate that they read the Journal and

find it to be a source of inspiration. They indicate that it makes them more aware of various cultural activities of the Fund worldwide. Some only quickly skim through the content and suggest that some changes could be made to accomodate people with little time. Most greatly appreciate the content, although some say that the design of the Journal forms an obstacle to reading it.

ConTribUTions of PrinCe ClaUs fUnd To PUbliCaTionsThe Prince Claus Fund contributed in the period from

2001 to 2005 to the publication (twenty-seven times) and distribution (once) of publications and magazines (eleven), to meetings geared toward the book industry (nine), and travel costs to, among others, book fairs (ten) such as the international children’s book fair in Bologna or an international poetry festival in Dakar, Senegal. The fund was instrumental in setting up the Caribbean Publishers Network, contributed to the preservation of an audiovisual library in Pakistan, and a computer for a very promising writer. The Fund was also a partner in a number of projects, including, for example, via a contribution to the magazine Generation Now, a Dutch youth magazine. The Prince Claus Fund contributed content to this magazine in order to bring projects and activities to the attention of this

target group. In total € 1.217 million in contributions were granted in the period from 2001 to 2005, to 61 external projects, averaging € 19,956 per contribution. The lowest contribution was given to a study into the history of photography in the Caribbean (€ 621). The highest contribution was to set up a database with on-line access about the photographer Hashem El Madani, by the Arab Image Foundation in Lebanon (€ 96,968).

effeCTs of The ConTribUTionsThe contributions to small publishing houses, magazines,

and travel costs for setting up or expanding networks in the publishing industry are appreciated. Beneficiaries indicate that contributions have made it possible to considerably expand networks in which relevant information can be exchanged and to attract more attention to their activities.

awards booKsIn connection with the annual presentation of the

Prince Claus Awards, a book is published about the theme of the Award and the laureates with circulation of 4,500 pieces.

box 4.2: TheMes of JoUrnal ediTions

Journal 6, december 2001Articles about diverse topicsJournal 7, december 2001Special edition with Carnival as subjectJournal 8, march 2002Special edition with Cosmopolitanism and the Nation-State as subjectJournal 9, august 2003Articles about diverse topicsJournal 10a, december 2003Special edition with The Future is Handmade, The Survival and Innovation of Crafts as subject Journal 11, december 2004Special edition with Asylum and Migration as subject


effeCTs of The awards booKsBecause the Awards Book, besides the Journal, is

widely distributed, many respondents mention it. The quality of the publication is appreciated and the content inspires.

libraryThe priority of the Library is to publish topics that are

of great cultural interest in quality publications. This concerns topics that the Fund believes would not be published without the Fund and would therefore get no attention.

Talented authors and artists from the working countries of the Fund are given the opportunity to bring innovative ideas and cultural outlooks to the attention of a wide audience. The production takes place in collaboration with renowned publishing houses across the globe, whereby access to distribution channels is one of the selection criteria.

In the period from 2001 to 2005, nine publications were published through the Prince Claus Fund Library fund. The publications generally appear in a circulation of 2,000 to 2,500 pieces. A successful book that appeared before the current evaluation period, The Art of African Fashion, was published in a circulation of 4,500 copies, and reprinting is planned.

effeCTs of The libraryFew respondents directly referred to titles from the

PCF Library. A few find that the Fund publishes nice books. Individual respondents express criticism of the availability, the quality, or accessibility of various publications, and therefore their usefulness.

4.2.3 exChanges and aCTiviTiesActivities (including Travel Budget) and Exchanges

were incorporated upon occasion as separate programmes into the annual overview of expenditures, sometimes jointly. As of 2004, Activities, Travel Budget, and Exchanges were combined into one budget item.

Applications must fit within the central themes of the

Fund, which are sub-categorised into sub-themes. (Zones of Silence, Creating Spaces of Freedom, Beauty in Context, and Living Together). Accents within these themes were, e.g., Urban Heroes (as of 2000), within which, among others, film productions were financed and Truth and Reconciliation. In 2003 the theme Zones of Silence focused on the development of activities in war zones and politically complex countries by means of a visit to the Congo to establish contacts and scout. This resulted in nine projects in the following years. At the end of 2004, a similar orientation trip took place to Bangladesh and Pakistan, which led to the a number of travel tickets being granted. Areas where new activities and partners were sought in 2005 were Afghanistan, Bhutan, Iraq, Syria, and the Central Asian Republics.

“Humour and Satire” was added to the themes of Living Together and Creating Spaces of Freedom in 2005. With regard to disciplines, as of 2002 the Fund wished to better articulate and intensify the music policy, to which an orientation trip to Brazil contributed. In 2003, that was followed up by the release of several CDs with Afghan and Brazilian music, Senegalese and Moroccan rap music, and the development of the Bolivian Baroque Music commenced. The first partial sport activity of the Fund was also supported in 2003, the Street Arts Festival in Ivory Coast, after which this was added in 2004 as a discipline within the Fund. In 2004 attention was also given to experimental film and theatre.

In total, around 450 contributions were made to requests, including travel tickets. A description of the application procedure and the selection of applications can be found in the section entitled “Selection of Applications” (4.3 “Financial Management,” page 24). Box 4.3 gives a few examples of supported festivals and gatherings.

exChangesThe Exchanges Programme was set up to stimulate the

cultural debate in the (third) world by organising meetings about culture and development. Exchange among and support of local and international


networks also falls under this programme. The 2001 evaluation stated that this programme would be too great of a burden on the office and formulated a recommendation to focus on supporting meetings or conferences organised by third parties. This was adopted in the Vision for the Future. In the period from 2001 to 2005, under the exchange programme, fourteen conferences, lectures, and debates were organised by the Fund, chiefly in collaboration with other organisations. The majority (ten) of these activities took place in the Netherlands.

exChange ProJeCTs iniTiaTed by oThersOf the exchanges initiated by others, the majority took

place in Africa (82); in addition there were also events in Latin America and the Caribbean (34) and Asia (27). In addition to regional projects, there were at least seven cases of South-South exchange. The exchanges particularly concerned the disciplines of visual arts (27 times) (often in combination with audiovisual arts), culture, and development (25 times), theatre (22), literature (19), and dance (13). In total € 2.5 million in contributions were granted in the period from 2001 to

2005, to 117 projects (excluding travel tickets), averaging € 21,656 per contribution1. The exchange programme supports a broad range of activities, varying from a contribution to the anniversary activities of a Kenyan digital art education centre (€ 3,500) to support of the South African Centre for Creative Arts, which organises the “Time of the Writer Literary Festival” and “Poetry Africa” (incl. poetry, rap, and slam) and acts as a conduit of literature to the Townships (€ 90,000). Other activities include contributions to a literary festival in Chad, a conference about the Arabic-Turkish dialogue in Turkey, a contemporary dance workshop in Cambodia. In 2003, there was special attention for the Congo, with contributions to the Festival Internationale de l’Acteur with participants from eleven countries, and the Festival Carre, a Congolese/Gabonese theatre festival. In 2001 in Colombia, the Poetry Medellin festival received support, both with airplane tickets as well as for a specific audiovisual project about contemporary poetry. In 2006 this festival received the Alternative Nobel Peace Prize. It became a Hivos partner.

• visual arts: lima biennial, Peru; dak’art biennial, senegal; guangzhou Triennial, China; venice biennial, italy• dance: festival Montevideo sitiada, Uruguay• Film: Zanzibar international film festival, Tanzania; fespaco, burkina faso; durban film festival, south africa; buenos aires film festival,

argentina; shadow festival, amsterdam (documentary festival for experimental films), videobrasil international electronic art festival, brazil• Photo: aleppo, syria; rencontre de la Photographie africaine de bamako, Mali; Chobi Mela, Photo festival bangladesh (organised by network

partner driK, also travelling to Calcutta and new delhi); international Photography gathering, le Pont gallery, syria• literature: fest’africa sous les etoiles, Chad; Time of the writer, durban, south africa; Passaat winde (Trade winds) literature festival,

south africa; Utan Kayu literary festival, indonesia; les rencontres poétique internationale de dakar, senegal• Fashion: alokpa, Togo• music: international festival of latin american baroque and renaissance Music, bolivia; festival of the diaspora, south africa;

festival banlieu rhythm, senegal• cartoons: 5e salon africain de la bande dessinée et de la lecture pour la Jeunesse, Congo• theatre: festival of nigerian art, nigeria; festival Centroamericano de las artes, honduras; festival international de l’acteur, Congo;

filbleu theatre festival, Togo

box 4.3: seleCTion of sUPPorTed fesTivals and gaTherings


effeCTs of The exChange ProJeCTsBeneficiaries mentioned that, for example, organising

literary festivals in regions where a civil war has raged for an extended period fulfils a need of the population, which can contribute to recovery. South-South exchanges, such as those between India and Africa, were the beginning of recognition of Afro-Indian communities in India (Siddis) and led to new initiatives that can contribute to their socio-economic development. It also led to the setting up of an interest group. Another beneficiary lauds making possible an exchange between cultures (in this case between Latin America and Africa and between dancers and architects).

Governments that initially did not want to set aside any money to support certain cultural activities, now gladly do after proven success – thanks to the help of the Fund. The exchange often entails an important expansion of the beneficiaries’ professional networks and development.

aCTiviTiesThis programme provides support for projects of a

distinctive character and unexpected concepts. In the period from 2001 to 2005, it supported around 60 activities. These include the projects of the Prince Claus Fund, with potential collaborative partners as the support for activities of third parties. The Sahel Opera (see Box 4.4.) is by far the most important project of these.

aCTiviTies of Third ParTiesAmong the activities of third parties are many visual

arts projects (43 times), often with an audiovisual component (21 times). In addition, many projects were supported in the disciplines of theatre (28 times) and music (27 times). Most of the activities took place in Africa and Latin America including the Caribbean (both around 70 times) and to a lesser extent in Asia (25 times). In total almost € 3 million in contributions were disbursed in the period from 2001 to 2005, to 131 projects, averaging € 22,885 per contribution. The contributions of most of the projects are

between € 10,000 and € 50,000. A limited number of projects received a higher contribution. These are stated in Box 4.5.

effeCTs of ConTribUTion To aCTiviTiesThe beneficiaries are enthusiastic about the granting

process; in the applicant-Fund relationship, the elements of trust, respect, and equal treatment are specifically mentioned. The effects of support from the Fund that the respondents named are very diverse: Expansion of the activities of events, contacts with organisers of similar events on other

1. ‘International Cooperation’, October 1999, quoted in The World according to Prince Claus, 2004, F. Bieckmann, p. 344.

Prince Claus already spoke of his idea of a sahel opera in 1999: “and then i want to see a sahel opera or musical only with people from that region, including the director, with the theme of: The characteristics of the colonial ad-ministrator, especially the comical or ridiculous, and how that typology can be recognised in his african successor1.” The fund has worked since 2001 on this idea from Prince Claus in which the relationship between africa and europe is portrayed in music, dance, and theatre in an innova-tive, critical, and humorous manner; in 2007 the world premiere takes place in bamako, Mali. it is the largest project in the history of the fund, to which the fund contributed € 412,225 (2003-2006 provisions € 660,000) in the years 2004 and 2005 and further contributed, e.g., via network partner Jant-bi. after further elaborating the concept, in 2004, composers and musicians were recruited in the sahel region, and an international jury made a se-lection from them. in 2005 an artistic team was com-posed and workshops were held in senegal. The libretto was written with the theme being the dream of many af-ricans of a better life in europe. funds were obtained ex-ternally, whereby the national Postal Code lottery made the largest contribution (€ 1.5 million); the production occurs in collaboration with the Ministry of Culture in Mali and Théâtre du Châtelet in Paris. in 2006 the sahel opera foundation was established as well as a production office in Mali.

box 4.4: The sahel oPera


continents, increased possibilities for international exchange and cooperation, obtaining support from other donors, sometimes with active mediation of the Fund, enhancing the reputation of the supported event and greater (inter)national familiarity. In many cases, the support of the Fund was more than only a financial contribution. Respondents frequently mentioned the dialogue with regard to content and establishing the contacts as an important effect of the support from the Fund.

The collaboration with the Mondriaan Foundation made it possible to give the Dutch museum sector a more international orientation off the beaten paths, by organising orientation trips to the Middle East with Turkish artists, to China and to Africa.

Travel bUdgeTAs of 2003, tickets for travel are registered

separately in the database and no longer as a part of other programmes. In 2001 there was an available budget within the programmes of € 22,750, an increase of almost € 10,000 compared to the previous year. In 2002 this budget was raised to € 90,000. In the period from 2003 to 2005, 130 travel tickets were approved. The amounts vary from € 150 to € 4,500. In principle, the Prince Claus Fund only reimburses travel costs and not the costs of accommodations. A contribution to travel costs by the Fund can be the beginning of a long-term collaboration. For example, the Latin American architectural network

theatre appolius, amazigh (2001) (berber) theatre group, Morocco, gives a performance in Tamazight about their culture, in order to achieve broader recognition of their culture and language. Performances in Morocco, Tunisia, and possibly in egypt and spain. (€ 50,415) King Baabu (2001), play written by wole soyinka for performance in nigeria. (€ 74,217)odantalan (3rd phase) (2001) workshop with musicians and theorists from angola, brazil, Cuba, and Colombia to examine musical traditions between the two continents, among others, culminating in a joint Cd recording. (€ 69,882)circus Baobab (2002), an acrobatic institute and ensemble from guinea. financing of the tour “les Tambours sauteurs” through guinea and countries in the region. (€ 83,846)tolerance (2002) project in collaboration with youssou n’dour foundation: documentary by african filmmaker with the theme of religious diversity and tolerance. (€ 50,000)architectural artworks Programme (2002), south africa. a project for selection of visual arts for the newly built new south african Constitutional Court, Johannesburg. (€ 50,000)rwanda ’94 (2003) theatre, rwanda. a musical/theatre performance about the genocide in rwanda. (€ 52,000)

i la Galigo (2003), indonesia. a musical/dance/theatre piece based on a story originating from south sulawesi, a world tour from 2004 to 2006 (€ 65,000), plus a provision of € 35,000 for public activities of the Prince Claus fund in connection with performances in the netherlands (2004).istanbul Biennial Poetic Justice (2003), Turkey: support to 5 artists from brazil, india, Cuba, and south africa. (€ 60,000)Play thagaste (2003) (by souk ahras) in algeria: Costs of the theatre ensemble in algeria. Project eventually carried out on a more limited scale. (€ 60,000, rounded down after use to € 45,000)africa remix (2004) in Johannesburg, visual arts, an exhibition project (the largest exhibition of contemporary african art). (€ 60,000)documentary (2004) film by arun Khopkar about the indian architect Charles Correa (member of awards jury from 1998-2001). (€ 58,000)map of latin american dreams (2004) for which photographer Martin weber makes photos of people on the edge of society in parts of south america. (€ 55,000)ivaldo Bertazzo (2005) travel costs of dance ensemble in connection with performance at holland dance festival, The hague. (€ 50,000, of which € 10,000 provision for Pr activities of the fund)

box 4.5: ProJeCTs wiTh a ConTribUTion exCeeding € 50,000 froM The PrinCe ClaUse fUnd


Supersudaca initially received a ticket for travel and later became a Network Partner.

Tickets were in particular granted to artists from Africa (57), Asia (41), and Latin America (21). The 130 tickets concern almost all disciplines. The disciplines of visual arts (33), literature (16), music (15), audio visual (14), and culture and development (14) are relatively strongly represented. More than half of the supported trips have as travel destination a country in North America or Europe, of which 66 trips to the Netherlands.

effeCTs of granTing TiCKeTsThe effects that the respondents cite of their trip are

very diverse. A beneficiary, an organiser of a festival, was able to allow the West to become acquainted with experimental contemporary music by inviting a Chinese group. This also expanded these musicians’ horizons and they came into contact with potential partners. It would have been impossible to have them come without the contribution of the Fund. An example of a South-South exchange is an artist from the Caribbean who was able to stay in South Africa. This allowed her to further develop, to collaborate with various exhibits, and to obtain new artist in residence opportunities in Asia.

4.2.4 neTworK ParTnershiPIn the Network Partnership Programme, the Fund

engages in long-term collaboration with organisations that themselves have a network function. The aim is to use mutual networks in various regions and disciplines over a three-year period and to develop joint, innovative activities, such as a book, performance, or exhibition. Network Partners in principle meet one another two times annually, one of which takes place at an activity of one of the Network Partners. In early 2006, the first Network Partnership was concluded with Video Brasil. The contracts with a number of other partnerships have been extended. The Network Partners are mentioned in short in Box 4.6.

In part for the purposes of continuity of the Network partner organisation after conclusion of the collaboration with the Fund, the board wishes to have clarity before engaging in the partnership about the finances and other sponsors of the organisations; it also wants to know how they will continue the work after conclusion of the contract1. In 2005 an internal interim evaluation of the established relationships was carried out. Communication between the Fund and the Network Partners turned out to be of crucial importance.

effeCTs of The neTworK ParTnershiPThe Network Partners highly value the collaboration

with the Prince Claus Fund, among others, because the Fund gives space to the individual or organisation and engages in cooperation on the basis of genuine equality. The partners also make a conscious choice for collaboration. Just like the

1. Board Meeting minutes, 5 November 2004 and 25 February 2005.

triangle arts trust, great britain(2002, € 141,000 for 3 years)videoBrasil, brazil (2002, € 180,000 for 3 years)centre for caribbean arts (CCa), Trinidad and Tobago (2003, € 178,700 for 3 years) (This partnership was prematurely ended in 2006)Zanzibar international Film Festival, Tanzania(2004, € 216,000 for 3 years)Komunitas utan Kayu, indonesia(2004, € 163,746 for 3 years)Jant-Bi, senegal (2004, € 215,116 for 3 years)associación pro arte y cultura (aPaC), bolivia(2005, € 185,000 for 3 years)drik Picture library, bangladesh(2005, € 200,000 for 3 years)mathare sports Youth association, Kenya(2005, € 174,800 for 3 years)supersudaca, south america (2005, € 180,000 for 3 years)

box 4.6: neTworK ParTners


Fund, they are looking for an organisation that they trust and respect. The network must be one in which they gladly participate. This is the case for them with the Prince Claus Fund. Engaging in a partnership with the Fund has added value; it gives prestige and makes it easier to raise other funds. The partnership stimulates creativity and creates dialogue. The ongoing discussion about culture and development is appreciated. In preparation for the time after termination of the partnerships, the Network Partners mentioned support in improving management and fundraising skills. This item also came up during the discussion of the internal evaluation with the Network Partners, whereby the Fund suggested that partners can profit from each other’s knowledge in these areas.

4.2.5 CUlTUral eMergenCy resPonseThe Cultural Emergency Response Programme (CER)

was established in 2003 in order to be able to offer quick assistance after an emergency, for repair of cultural heritage in a broad sense1. CER operates on the basis that culture is a basic need of human beings and therefore an essential part of humanitarian emergency relief. Per case, a maximum amount of € 25,000 is available; the total available budget is € 100,000 annually. In principle, action is taken within six months after a disaster. In the period from 2003 to 2005, ten projects were supported.

In addition to the clear material needs after a disaster, the CER programme draws attention to the cultural environment and the contribution that repair thereof can give to the identity and the self-confidence of those affected. Initially, CER was conceived as a programme in cooperation with the International Council of the Blue Shield (ICBS), an overarching organisation in which several international non-governmental heritage organisations are represented. Although ICBS withdrew, the collaboration with a number of these organisations and their international networks has continued in order to quickly identify activities after disasters.

The board has authorised a CER steering committee to take decisions about actions up to € 25,000; the board decides over higher amounts2. Meanwhile, it has been decided that the CER will continue as a

1. The program was presented during the “War and Cultural Heritage” gathering on 26 September 2003.2. Board Meeting minutes, 4 August 2005.

central library, university of Baghdad, iraq (2003) repair of the reading room after destruction and theft.citadel in Bam, iran (2004) saving archive and documenting situation after the earthquake.mosque in mestassa, morocco (2004) restoration and reinforcement of 14th-century berber Mosque.Greek orthodox church, nablus, Palestinian territory (2004) repair of roof of saint demethros, under which there is an extraordinary wooden ceiling.national Gallery, Kingston, Jamaica (2004)repair of water damage after hurricane ivan.sarrieh and al-saddar houses in nablus, Palestinian territory (2005) saving and stabilizing two houses.nias heritage museum, indonesia (2005)improved reconstruction of museum storehouse, earthquake resistant.underwater archaeological site and museum, Galle, sri lanka (2005) Moving of the Maritime archaeological Unit and re-establishment of damaged infrastructure in order to be able to continue work as quickly as possible.the Kommunitas maestro, atjeh, indonesia (2005) redevelopment of a music studio with recording equipment and instruments for a music and education organisation.Banda atjeh, indonesia (2005) reconstruction of a village with a crafts infrastructure (for making traditional instruments) that suffered under the Tsunami.tanoh albee library, atjeh (2005)reconstruction of library where ancient manuscripts are kept (in collaboration with Cordaid).

box 4.7: ProJeCTs sUPPorTed Under The Cer PrograMMe


Prince Claus Fund programme until 2011, with its own employee. A possible future independent existence is being considered. An interim evaluation is planned. The one-time collaboration with Cordaid did not lead to a more long-term collaborative framework. In early 2007, the National Postal Code Lottery granted a financial contribution of € 200,000 to CER.

The CER conference held in 2006 under the name “Culture is a Basic Need,” brought the subject to the attention of the international community and took stock after three years of CER. It recommended stepping up political support for cultural emergency relief and providing more funds for this.

effeCTs of CerBesides their cultural impact, the CER actions

contribute in a positive sense to the social context. The modus operandi of some of the CER actions was strongly geared toward use of local technologies and intensively involving the local population, a work method that takes into account and shows respect for the local culture. An expert cited this as an important element in reconstruction, whereby not so much efficiency counts as does the effect achieved by participation and debate. CER actions have contributed to sending a positive signal from which affected parties have been able to draw hope and faith.

Contacts made via a CER intervention can lead to new contacts in the Netherlands or elsewhere, sometimes to new projects. A CER intervention can also persuade the local or national governments to make a contribution. The recipients assess the experiences with the Fund positively: the Fund works efficiently, unbureaucratically, and without arrogance. A number of CER contractors argue for expansion of the programme with an extension, for example, to dilapidated cultural heritage or sustainable development of cultural heritage. The steering committee, however, stresses the niche of CER: cultural emergency relief.

4.3 finanCial ManageMenTFollowing the review in 2001, since 2002 the Vision for

the Future has introduced a new apportionment formula in the multi-year budget for 2002-2011. In this, the programme items are divided between the programme components Awards and Other programme activities. This apportionment formula was amended when the subsidy amount proved to be lower. Diagram 4.2 shows the increase in the budget in the ‘revised multi-year budget 2002-2011’ (included in the Subsidy Decision issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs1).

With the exception of 2002, the division of the budget between the programme components is specified in greater detail in the annual budgets. Table 4.3 shows the relative distribution of the budget amongst the various programmes and overheads.

In 2002 and the preceding years, the total salaries of the office employees were entered as an overhead. As of 2003, a proportion of the salaries were entered under projects2, which led to a reduction in the percentage of overhead costs in the total budget to 15-16% in the

1. Subsidy Decision issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 6 June 2002.2. 2006 Budget, Minutes, General Board Meeting, 8 November 2002.

Total

Programmeactivities

Awards

diagraM 4.2: revised MUlTi-year bUdgeT 2002-2011

bedragen x € 1.000


years 2004-2006. In comparison, research has shown that around 15% of the costs incurred by organisations funded under the Dutch theme-based co-financing programme are classed as overheads1. It is the Fund’s aim to limit overheads to 15 %.

As a result of the higher subsidy amounts and resources from fundraising, the budgets for all programmes have been increased since 2002. The original apportionment of around 20% for each programme was therefore dropped. A striking deviation in expenditure with regard to the budget in 2003 was due to the fact that the bridging facility was converted into a designated reserve. This was linked to amended legislation. The underutilisation in 2005 was caused by the fact that expenditure at the end of 2005 was entered under 2006.

As activities being carried out are funded in various stages, a reserve fund of approximately € 3 million is maintained at all times for the purpose of future obligations. In 2005 there were still obligations in respect of around seventy ongoing projects.

seleCTion of aPPliCaTionsIn 2000 procedures were developed and established

with regard to the receipt and processing of applications for funding. A complaints procedure was also set up2. Upon receipt of an application it is first assessed whether this is in line with the Prince Claus Fund policy3. The remaining applications4 are assessed on the basis of:

1. the extent to which the activity ties in with the formulated themes or priorities Living Together, Creating Spaces of Freedom (Amnesty for Culture), Beauty in Context or Zones of Silence;

2. the criteria quality, innovation/ engagement, development relevance culturally cross border, respect, trust;

3. the extent to which the proposed activity contributes towards emphasising the issue in question in the Netherlands, raising the profile of the Fund’s partners and whether it is a priority within a region or topic;

4. whether or not the application has come from a ‘DAC’ country1?

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

budget. expend. budget. expend. budget. expend. budget. expend. budget. expend. budget.

awards 20 21 19 18 17 17 18 17 18 19 19

Publications 12 10

53

8 13 13 12 13 13 12 13

exchanges 22 17 14 17 2151 51 37 40 38

activities (incl. tickets) 23 24 19 23 22

networks - 6 - 21 14 14 3 3 13 12 11

Total programmes 77 78 72 80 84 87 83 84 81 83 81

Total overheads 20 19 27 19 16 13 16 15 18 16 18

bridging facility 3 3 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1 1

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Total amounts (x1000) 2776 2899 3102 3778 4028 4082 4324 4290 4199 3957 4273

Table 4.3: sUMMary of bUdgeT aMoUnTs and exPendiTUre (in percentages)

1. ‘Evaluation of the Theme-based Co-financing Programme Cross-cutting Study: The added value of TMF, Final Report’, p.39 and 47, March 2006. It is stated in this document that TMF organisations report that overheads account for an average of 15% of their expenditure (Dutch TMF organisations 18.7%, foreign organisations 11.8%). (http://www.minbuza.nl/binaries/pdf/bz-begroting--jaarverslag/bz-evaluatieprogrammering-2006/5-6-evaluaties-tmf-9-thematische-meerwaarde.pdf); e-mail Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 28 February 2007.

2. ‘Procedure with regard to Fund activities that fall within the category of programme activities, publications and exchange’, established during the Board Meeting on 10-11-2000, amended in July 2004; ‘Procedure with regard to project administration’, amended version 29 July 2004, ‘Administrative Organisation of the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development’, version dated 22-03-2005.

3. Applications that will not be considered include applications: relating to documentaries or films, research, study grants, academic publications, an activity or applicant in a western country, in the event of a North-South exchange, a long-term project, applications of an infrastructural nature or where the focus is on education. Applications in relation to projects that have already commenced or that are submitted too close to the date on which an activity is due to commence will also not be considered. Other applications will indeed be processed.

4. The criteria chart on which this is elaborated was introduced in 2003 for the purpose of internal processing, and as a summary document for the ‘Voorstellencommissie’ [Proposals Committee] and the Board.


1. This criterion (to which exceptions may be granted) was introduced during an informal discussion meeting (Report, 28 October 2005) for internal use, and is repeated in the minutes of the content of the discussion as a binding board resolution (20 April 2006). A DAC country is a country that appears on the ODA (recipients of ‘Official Development Assistance’) list compiled by the Development Assistance Committee (OECD). The 2005 list includes 152 countries from the least developed to the middle-income countries and territories. In the context of the 2007-2010 co-financing system, co-financing organisations must contribute towards the fight against poverty in DAC 1 countries, namely the 50 least developed countries.

2. The Proposals Committee was set up in April 2003.3. Report of the Meeting of the Proposals Committee, 4 August 2004.4. http://www.princeclausfund.org/en/who_we_are/contact/funding.shtml5. Minutes of the meeting of the Executive Committee, 22 February 2002: stop for six months up to October 2002; Prince Claus Fund website 2006

and discussions.6. Discussion with Els van der Plas, 5 February 2007 and complaints dossier.

This assessment is carried out on the basis of a ‘project cover page’ and an internal assessment form. When assessing applications, advice is obtained from the International Advisory Board, other external experts and the Dutch embassies in the region in question. Applications for funding of up to € 10,000 may be determined by the director. Applications relating to sums in excess of this must be submitted to a Proposals Committee set up for this purpose, which consists of three board members2. The Committee carries out a basic review of the proposal submitted by the office and if the decision is taken to grant the application, sends this back for further information; alternatively the proposal may be rejected. During this assessment, the Committee does not simply examine whether the content of a project is in line with the Prince Claus Fund policy, but also the social (and political) context of the activity and the applicant (involvement)3. The board takes due note of the decisions reached by the ‘Proposals Committee’.

Interested parties can find information on the subsidy options offered by the Fund on the Prince Claus Fund website. Applicants are requested to submit a short description (‘letter of intent’), preferably by e-mail, of the activity that they plan to undertake. If the Fund deems it necessary, an individual or organisation may be invited to submit an application in full on an (electronic) application form. The aim of the Fund, the geographical focus and the areas that fall outside of the scope of the Fund are all mentioned on the website, however the minimum and maximum subsidy amounts paid out by the Fund are not stated. The website also features links to alternative funds both in the Netherlands and abroad.4

The Fund receives 500 - 650 applications each year.

Of these, around 20% are granted. In 2002, and again in 2006 (officially outside of the period covered by this review), the Fund was forced to call a temporary

halt to the processing of applications. In 2001/2002 due to the pressure of work and in order to clear backlogs (as a result of the introduction of a database system, amongst other things), and in 2006 due to the expectation that funds would run out prematurely5.

resPonses To The aPPliCaTion ProCedUreTen embassies have indicated that they have been

asked by the Fund for advice on applications. If an application is refused (this may include proposals submitted regarding laureates that have not been honoured), embassies are generally informed of this. Laureates have also indicated that they have been consulted for the purpose of issuing a recommendation. A recipient stated that the procedure has improved since the time at which he first submitted an application, as it helps applicants to organise their ideas more effectively and therefore give a more complete picture of their envisaged purpose. None of the recipients made a specific comment regarding the application procedure or the awarding of funds, however responses with regard to the manner in which the Fund operates were positive.

To date there has been one single complaint regarding the rejection of an application in February 2001. This notice of objection was not sustained6.

evalUaTion of aCTiviTiesA standardised progress report is requested for each

contract at the time at which an interim payment is made. This must contain a short report of activities carried out, any bottlenecks encountered and solutions to these. The report should also contain information on any bottlenecks that are still anticipated, the percentage of the budget spent, how far the activities have progressed and any other further details or comments. On the basis of this report, an interim evaluation takes place between


1. Prince Claus Fund, minutes of Internal Meetings of Programme Coordinators, 15 December 2005 and 19 January 2006.2. Amendment to the Statutes of the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development, 2 June 2006.

3. Minutes of the General Board Meeting, 7 November 2003, point 5a, p. 3 and Appendix ‘Culture and Development Advisory Committee’.

the Fund and the contract partner, followed by any necessary adjustments to the activities. At the end of the activity a final report must be submitted including, where applicable, tangible items such as a CD, book, photos etc. Once these have been evaluated the final payment can be made. At the end of 2005, the Fund began to have further thoughts on an evaluation method focussed on cultural projects, during and after the project1.

4.4 organisaTionThe board meets approximately four times per year

(at least three times per year in accordance with the Statutes2). In addition to the honorary chairmen, the board consists of eight members. Board members are appointed for a period of three years, with the possibility of one-off reappointment; the majority of members of the board were replaced around 2001. A degree of continuity was, however, maintained. In 2005 there were three individuals on the board who had been board members as far back as 2001.

In 2001, the board was advised by an International Advisory Board ( twenty three members, mainly international) consisting of four committees: the Award Committee, the Exchange Committee, the Publication Committee and an Activities Committee. The Exchange Committee and the Activities Committee were discontinued in 2003 and replaced by the Committee for Culture and Development, in order to chart international developments and trends for the purpose of supporting the direction of the Fund and to prepare new activities3. Since then, this committee and the Award Committee have formed the International Advisory Committee. 2003 also saw the establishment of the Network Committee, which included a representative from each of the Network partners (approx. ten) and one from the Fund. The Publication Committee became the Editorial Board of the Prince Claus Fund Library. This was joined by the CER Steering Committee in 2004. A three-member delegation was established in 2003 in the form of the Proposals

Committee, which handles all applications for sums in excess of € 10,000 (tickets € 4,500, CER € 25,000).

The offiCeUntil 2006, the Fund had five programme

coordinators, (5 ftes, one of whom holds a senior position, and one further employee for each programme). This team was supported by two assistants. The office grew in the field of PR/communication (see section 4.5). During the course of 2006 there was a reorganisation with the aim of introducing an additional management layer between the director and the programme employees. The roles of Head of Finance, Personnel and Programme Cohesion and Head of Communication and Information were created for this purpose. A clear distinction was also made between the ‘passive part’ of the Fund, including the ‘Applications Bureau’ and the support provided by the Committee for Culture and Development, and the ‘active part’, including the Award Programme, Networks, CER and the project office.

The ‘Applications Bureau’, lead by the Senior Programme Coordinator, follows the applications from the time of receipt, via board or office decision to the drawing up of the contract, the payment of subsidies and the final report. The Senior Programme Coordinator is also responsible for coordinating Finances and Personnel in collaboration with the external administrator. Within the ‘Applications Bureau’ there is an applications programme coordinator and two applications assistants (3.6 ftes in total). The Head of Communication and Information is also responsible for press and publicity and the documentation centre (2.0 ftes in total and 1 volunteer). The documentation centre has benefited from the contributions made by professional volunteers.

The programme coordinators for the active programmes report directly to the director (5 FTE, 3 programme coordinators, 1 project coordinator and 1 Assistant to the Awards Programme). The project bureau(1 FTE) works on the projects that are


1. Letter from the Board of the Prince Claus Fund to the review committee, 12 March 2007.2. Correspondence from the Central Fundraising Bureau to the Prince Claus Fund, 18 Apri1 2006, 2 October 2006, amongst others.

related to the ‘active fund’, which are managed either internally or externally, such as the Sahel Opera, a Culture and Development symposium and the CER symposium. Trainees are involved regularly within the Awards programme, Exchanges and Communication. Temporary employees are brought in, for example in the run-up to the Awards Ceremony.

adMinisTraTive organisaTion and finanCesThe administrative organisation is described in a

document (latest version 22 March 2005) on the basis of the stages in the administrative process: Budget, Budgeting Summary (including guidelines with regard to the management, the advisory structure, the board, the offices and programme activities), Administration and Reports. This document is also used to establish the offices’ internal consultative structures. The description of the administrative organisation (AO) has been drawn up by the external administrator. The external administrator is also responsible for assessing the relevance of the Description of the AO every two years and amending this where necessary. The administra-tive organisation described has been approved by the board.

The entire process of liquidity management is carried out by the external administrator. The required subsidies are requested on behalf of the Prince Claus Fund and funds received are invested on the basis of the (biannual) liquidity plan. The investments are made in a conservative manner by means of a current account, savings account or deposits. Payment transactions are also carried out by the external administrator.

The Association of Fundraising Organizations has developed guidelines for the continuity reserve, amongst other things. This reserve, which amounted to € 442,000 on 31 December 2006, is equal to 50 percent of the average annual office costs over the years 2002 to 2006 inclusive, which means that it lies at the bottom (0.5) of the desired bandwidth (0.5-1.5 of the fixed annual expenditure). The board has taken due note of this and has informed the review

committee that this reserve will be increased to 75% of the annual budget for office costs1.

CenTral bUreaU of fUndraising [CenTraal bUreaU fonsenwerving, Cbf] aCCrediTaTionSince December 2004, the Prince Claus Fund has been

in possession of CFB accreditation, which has been compulsory for beneficiaries of games of chance organisations (including the National Postal Code Lottery) since 2001. The CFB assesses the areas Management, Policy, Fundraising, Information and Communication, Deployment of resources and Reporting procedure. The accreditation lasts for five years, during which period the annual report is assessed every year and interim assessments are carried out. To date an annual audit has taken place on two occasions, during which it was established that there are no ‘outstanding anomalies’. The Fund was asked to draw up a code of conduct2. The external accountant made a statement in the audit report to the effect that the Prince Claus Fund is in compliance with the Reporting Guidelines for Fundraising Institutions [Richtlijn Verslaglegging Fondswervende Instellingen] (Council for Annual Reporting [Raad voor de Jaarverslaglegging, RJ] 650), which meant that it had met the requirements in respect of CFB accreditation.

4.5. PosiTioning and CoMMUniCaTionIn 2001, the evaluation committee recommended that

the Fund improve familiarity with its profile and activities in both beneficiary countries and in its own country. In the Vision for the Future, a first step is taken towards a detailed description of the objectives for positioning and communication in the world and in the Netherlands. Communication policy was intensified by the recruitment of a communication employee in 2002. Following the expansion of the number of communication employees, which resulted in the creation of a Communication Department in 2004, a communication policy and communication strategy were formulated, with annual communi-cation plans and plans for anniversaries. However, this did not result in a formal, long-term communi-cation plan.


PosiTioningThe key words used in the positioning of the Fund are:

a unique fund, positioned between development assistance organisations and international cultural organisations. By using substantive criteria in its implementation of the programme and by striving to achieve quality and innovation, the fund wants to be involved in (inter)national collaboration with vehicles for culture and sponsors that want to comply with the criteria formulated by the Fund, thus creating a high-quality international exchange platform. It also wants to advise international funds and organisations based on the expertise that it has gained1.

To date, the Fund has maintained a clear distance between itself and development assistance organisations in its positioning. In collaboration situations, its preferred choices were cultural or academic funds or institutions. Various respondents from the field who were interviewed understood this clear choice, but also thought that it could now be time to profile the ‘development’ dimension more clearly in the ‘culture and development’ concept, given the fact that 10 years into its existence, the Fund is now ‘established’. Organisations in the field of development assistance have indicated that they would like to learn more from the experiences and expertise that the Prince Claus Fund has in connection with culture and development.

effeCTs of PosiTioningOn the subject of positioning, a number of embassies

observe that knowledge about the Fund’s activities would seem to be limited to a cultural elite. However, they also feel that this is what determines the attraction. It is observed that the popularisation of culture is difficult everywhere. The word ‘elite’ is also used by those interviewed in the Netherlands. The special connection with the Royal Family is appreciated, because it helps to bring the Fund and the subject of culture and development to the attention of a broader group of people.

CoMMUniCaTionIn recent years, efforts have been made to create

more press opportunities than just those for the Awards. One example of these efforts is the organisation of public events with other funds or cultural organisations. Added to this, productions, conferences or informal receptions are organised around a visit by a laureate or beneficiary, with invitations sent out to people from a specific target group (e.g. financiers, politicians, representatives from one specific art discipline). In the past, the Fund made a number of suggestions to the Minister. On the basis of these suggestions, visits were made when travelling on official business. These visits included a visit to the Director of the National Museum in Kabul (award winner) and to a dance performance in Cape Verde.

The Fund feels that it is important to improve communication in the Netherlands. Efforts to achieve greater independence from the government mean that other institutions and/or other financial backers must be aware of its existence. In order to improve the Fund’s profile, which includes its role as an initiating and active organisation, ideas have been formulated on the use of communication resources. These include the development of a one liner, constant updating of the website, the production of a brochure, using paid communication (newspaper advertising) and the organisation of conferences2. These ideas were implemented in 2005 and 2006; however, the Fund is still looking for an evocative one liner.

The audience group for the Fund in the Netherlands consists of highly educated, socially engaged residents, working or involved in culture and/or development assistance, and immigrants that have a connection with their country of origin. The following is added to the above: ‘In the first instance […] the target group [is] even smaller: politicians, the Ministry, other funds and organisations, opinion leaders in the art and culture sector and development assistance’, because this is where political decision-making occurs1.

Since 2003, the Fund has been trying to ensure that it is better prepared for media attention by preparing a

1. Vision for the Future, 2001, p. 10.2. Communicatie in Nederland, internal work memorandum, 9 June 2005.


sheet of Questions and Answers, usually consisting of approximately one page, for important events like the Awards. The Fund prepares this sheet on occasions where criticism is expected, as was the case with the laureate Mahmoud Darwish in 2004 and the 2002 UNDP Human Development Report in 2003. A Q&A sheet was also prepared in 2005, around the presentation of an award to a cartoonist, at a time when the Danish cartoon issue was very much in the news. However, the Fund was not approached in this connection.

From 2001 to 2005, the PR and information budget has increased from € 16,508 to € 73,347. This increase is particularly due to an increase in costs for the annual report and annual plan, which have been published in Dutch and English and circulated widely in the form of a booklet since 2004 (annual report 2003). This makes it possible to make the Fund and its activities more prominent for the government, the National Postal Code Lottery and other institutions, etc.2 Costs in relation to the website have only been indicated separately since 2005 (€ 37,151. This website was completely updated in that year and is available in both Dutch and English. Pages in French and Spanish, containing general information, have now been added too.

effeCTs of CoMMUniCaTion and Pr efforTsOther institutions within the culture or culture and

development sectors are familiar with the annual reports and appreciate that the Fund has not only managed to get a photo of the awards, showing the Royal Family and the laureate, in the newspaper, but also more substantive articles on one or more laureates. They also see that the Fund is having increasing success in getting articles on artists from ‘its network’ in the art pages. However, the support provided by the Fund is not always mentioned. Colleagues feel that, as such, the Fund is able to bring

the subject of culture and development to the attention of a broad public. Staff from funds that focus on development, but not directly with culture, have been found to be less familiar with the Fund’s programmes and are primarily familiar with the Fund because of publicity in relation to its awards. Several representatives from the field of politics have followed the Fund over the years. They feel that the Fund does good work, but that it could make a bigger contribution to different debates in the Netherlands in connection with the subject of intercultural society or international issues. By doing this, the Fund could improve its visibility and, as such, its support from politicians and Dutch society. A foreign respondent expressed his appreciation of the Fund’s influence on Dutch attitudes to immigrants and to people from other cultures in the Netherlands.

The foreign network of laureates, beneficiaries and embassies very much appreciates being kept up-to-date on the activities of the Fund via its annual reports and the Journal. One beneficiary summarises the content of these publications and presents them to the local media. Some individuals would like to see an even broader circulation of these publications, to include libraries and (cultural) institutions that the Fund does not work with yet. By keeping its large network up-to-date, the Fund is giving everyone the opportunity to act as ‘ambassadors’ for the Fund.

The Internet is also named as an important source of information and suggestions have also been received on how to make it more accessible, more interactive and more lively, with online (worldwide) debates, music and videos of activities, links to interesting (partner) websites and by sending out a regular e-mail newsletter. Some embassies and (Dutch) organisations would like to communicate with the Fund better and be kept better informed of its activities.

1. Communicatie in Nederland, internal work memorandum, 9 June 2005.2. Minutes of the General Board Meeting, 27 February 2004.


In Section 2, the committee elaborated on a number of evaluation criteria, i.e. ‘effectiveness’, ‘efficiency’ and ‘sustainability’, based on the questions contained in the Terms of Reference. In this concluding section, these criteria will form the basis for the committee’s conclusions.

5.1 effeCTivenessThe Fund has a broadly formulated objective and a

very broadly defined concept of culture and development. At the same time, the Fund’s resources are relatively limited. If the measurability of the effect of development assistance on development is already complex1, this applies even more so to culture and development.

The central objective of the Prince Claus Fund is to increase understanding of cultures and to promote interaction between culture and development. On its 10-year anniversary, a number of questions were used to illustrate what the Funds feels is really important2: Are role models being created? Is awareness of a community being strengthened? Are people throughout the world able to express themselves freely and to develop? Are people finding support in their cultural heritages and history?

The committee bases its final conclusion on the effectiveness of the Fund’s activities on the following dimensions:

• The directional effect of the ‘culture and development’ concept

• The effectiveness of each of the programmes implemented by the Fund

• Programme cohesion and alignment• The positioning of the Fund

5.1.1 CUlTUre and develoPMenTThe Prince Claus Fund has a very broad interpretation

of the concept ‘culture and development’. The Fund would like this theme to be a constant subject of discussion and stimulates this. In this discussion, two different directions are becoming apparent, i.e. a

more philosophical versus a more action-oriented focus. In the starting points, the term ‘culture’ is explicitly not limited to ‘traditional’ cultural expressions (a narrower concept of culture), but also includes (mass) media, sport, norms and values, customs, singularities and the characteristics of people and societies (a broad and dynamic concept of culture). In the Fund’s interpretation, the term ‘development’ can be limited to the individual development potential of the artist, writer or philosopher applying to the Fund, who is able to use it to develop within his field; this can also radiate out into the environment, giving it a ‘contextual relevance’, or a ‘potential contextual relevance’.

The committee wonders how quality can be assessed within this broad interpretation of culture and whether, in addition to the scope it provides, this can also provide sufficient direction. The sum of the activities supported so far appears to define the term culture and development more clearly than is the case in the Fund’s policy and conceptual considerations. By drawing up an inventory of the supporting activities, the Fund will be able to formulate more precisely what it is supporting and therefore also define its own direction more clearly for the future.

5.1.2 The PrograMMesawardsVia the Awards programme, the Fund continually

introduces new themes that link up with the four main themes. These themes help to gain international attention for topical discussions, or can mark the beginning of renewed attention and appreciation for a niche like ‘crafts’ or humour. The Royal Family’s involvement in the Fund in general and in the awards in particular means that the awards gain prestige, something that is clearly appreciated by laureates. Collaboration with the embassies abroad when presenting ‘normal’ awards is also appreciated by all concerned and contributes to the national familiarity of both the laureates and the Fund. In comparison with national art awards, the amount awarded for the

5. ConClUsions and reCoMMendaTions

1. See, for instance, the report by the Commissie Draagvlak en Effectiviteit Ontwikkelingssamenwerking (the Dijkstal committee), ‘Vertrouwen in een kwetsbare sector?’, 6 April 2006, commissioned by ICCO, SNV and KIT.

2. Speech by Prince Constantijn, Honorary Chairman of the Prince Claus Fund, 6 september 2006.


main Prince Claus award is high. However, in compa-rison with international Dutch awards in the field of Culture and Science, it is not1.

The committee believes that the awards play an important role in the realisation of the Fund’s objectives. The awards give exposure and prestige to laureates and the activities that they are involved in and, as such, contribute to respect for one’s own culture. The Fund makes great efforts to bring the awards to the attention of a broader public and the committee feels that, given the nature of the subject, an important proportion of the potential target group is being reached.

PUbliCaTionsAs regards the Fund’s own publications, both the annual

report and the website have taken over part of the role played by the Journal, namely informing readers about the Fund’s activities. As a result, it is no longer necessary for the Journal to be published twice a year, as originally planned. Added to this, the Journal can focus on specific themes and no longer report on the Fund’s various activities. The Journal, the Award Book and the Annual Report have an international reader-ship and are appreciated as a source of information on the Fund’s themes and activities. However, there appears to be a need for a more easily accessible source of information from the Fund. The Fund could consider effecting an accelerated switch to electronic media for the publications indicated above, rather than maintaining the traditional paper publications (with due observance of the state of the art in the area of work relevant for the Fund). This could mean the introduction of a regular (e-mail) newsletter, in which short (photo) impressions are given of activities initiated by the Fund and of activities made possible with the Fund’s support. Contract partners can be asked to make (short) contributions. An additional efficiency advantage that the evaluation committee sees is that this facilitates the reduction of high budgets for the Journal, which are due in part to the sending costs involved.

Further to the first evaluation committee’s recommendation not to continue the Library, the

Fund has made a clear choice to do this nevertheless. The Fund believes that this makes it possible to discuss subjects in books that would not otherwise be published. The committee wonders whether the Library is the best way to bring these subjects to the attention of a broad public. Although a number of the publications are noticed internationally, distribution in the non-Western world would seem to be limited. Therefore, the committee believes that the Library only contributes to the realisation of the Fund’s objectives to a limited extent. Just as the first evaluation committee, the current committee wonders whether the Library ought to be one of the Fund’s core activities and whether the same could not be achieved by other means and at a lower cost. However, a final appraisal will require a more in-depth analysis than the analysis performed by the committee – given the mid-term-review nature of its evaluation.

aCTiviTies, exChanges, TiCKeTsBesides the Sahel Opera, the biggest project ever

undertaken by the Prince Claus Fund, the Fund is undertaking activities that position the Fund in the Netherlands too. The activities undertaken are often innovative and in many cases reach a public interested in culture or international collaboration.

In the contributions to activities initiated by third parties (including exchange projects and tickets), the balanced spread over both disciplines and regions is noticeable, a variety that is being pursued deliberately. The large number and diversity of activities that are being organised on a relatively modest budget is striking too. The Fund is actively scouting for future partners in areas with which the Fund is unfamiliar, the so-called Zones of Silence. This has paid off; sometimes more time is needed for this to lead to new activities. There are (a limited number of cases of) activities that have not been developed in full. For example, efforts are still being made to find a place (in Africa) for the Prince Claus Fund’s fashion collection (1998), a ‘Crafts exhibition’ has been in preparation since 2003, and a Tolerance music/video project with Youssou N’Dour is awaiting completion.

1. Erasmus Prize $150,000; Heineken Prize (provided by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences [Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen]) $ 150,000.


The activity programme contributes directly to the realisation of the Fund’s objectives. Added to this, the Fund’s active role makes it clear to the outside world that the Fund has substantive expertise. However, the committee has observed that familiarity with the Fund’s activities abroad is still inadequate within the Netherlands, despite efforts by the Fund, such as ticket provision, for example, which makes it possible for partners to take part or to perform in festivals and conferences in the Netherlands.

In 2001, the Fund was still active in the organisation of conferences in India, for example, as part of its exchange programme. However, since 2002, the Fund has focused on the organisation of conferences in the Netherlands, which it has been involved in itself, often doing so in collaboration with other organisations. As such, the Fund has adopted a recommendation made by the first evaluation committee. The committee believes that these conferences give depth to the concept of ‘culture and development’ in a broad sense. Because alignment has primarily been sought with organisations in the field of culture and science, attention has focused more on the ‘culture’ dimension than on the ‘development’ dimension.

neTworK ParTnershiPWith the introduction of the Network Partnership

Programme, the Prince Claus Fund has found a way to enter into long-term collaboration with others. The Fund is using these partnerships to attempt to break through the traditional donor-recipient relationship, by achieving collaboration based on equality with the network partner, in which both parties are actively involved. After four years, the programme has clearly developed, also with regard to relationships with partners and relationships between southern partners. For the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the programme is in line with policy whereby subsidised organisations are invited to enter into long-term partnerships, in order to promote sustainability in international collaboration.

The network partnerships contribute to the strengthening of South-South exchanges and to exchanges between disciplines. As a result, intercultural exchanges are achieved in an innovative way and the exchange of expertise is inspirational for all concerned. The committee believes that the partnerships function well: just one was ended prematurely. The committee supports the wish expressed by a number of the network partners for further support in the development of skills in the field of organisation/management and fund acquisition.

CUlTUral eMergenCy resPonseThe introduction of this programme has entered a

niche area in which few other organisations are active. After a disaster, humanitarian organisations have priorities that do not include culture, and cultural organisations often lack the power to respond quickly after a disaster. The Prince Claus Fund set this programme up with a relatively modest budget and has taken action on 11 occasions in a short period of time. This programme was brought to the attention of a broad, international public during the 2006 CER conference with the title ‘Culture is a Basic Need’.

To date, a development assistance organisation has contributed once to a CER action. The government is interested at a substantive level, while private parties are still cautious. Given its size, the CER programme has played an important warning function in addition to its practical usefulness. However, for it to be possible for a CER programme to be really effective, broader support is necessary. In 2007, support was obtained from the National Postal Code Lottery, as a result of which the resources available have increased significantly. Efforts are also being made to interest private parties in the CER programme. The committee believes that the CER programme makes a valuable contribution to the Fund’s objective. The nature of the activities would seem suitable for the acquisition of funds from various parties, both development organisations and private parties.


The aPProaCh TaKen To ParTnersVirtually unanimously, those involved are positive on

the approach adopted by the Prince Claus Fund in comparison with other organisations: ‘respectful, professional, equal, not controlling’. This approach is in line with the philosophy of Prince Claus. The committee concurs with this and feels that the general appreciation that the Fund gains as a result is a special achievement.

5.1.3 PrograMMe CohesionIn the first years of the Fund’s existence, resources

were divided evenly over the (then) four programmes. This division evolved towards greater emphasis on supporting activities and exchanges, and recently on the increasing importance of network partnerships. The introduction of this new programme is intended to achieve the deepening or intensification of activity implementation. The CER programme has resulted in an expansion of the Fund’s field of activity to an area that the committee considers relevant. The committee feels that one of the Fund’s strengths is its initiation of new programmes based on current developments, which support the Fund’s objective and, as response shows, can be considered a success. The awards programme continues to play an important role, both in terms of the development of new themes for the Fund and in terms of the visibility of the Fund and laureates. The Publications, Activities and Exchange programmes in general and the last two programmes in particular are increasingly merging into one programme in the budgets.

Various target groups are being reached with the programmes chosen: different disciplines, for different social segments and different levels at which cultural activities are enjoyed. The committee believes that this contributes to the achievement of the Fund’s objectives.

When implementing activities, the Fund has two different approaches, i.e. an active and a passive approach. The committee feels that emphasis on the active approach is good, because special projects (e.g. the Sahel Opera) strengthen the Fund’s position.

This counterbalances the higher overheads to be expected. The Fund could speak out more clearly on the connection between the different approaches, whereby both strategies are considered important.

5.1.4 CoMMUniCaTionDuring the last Board meeting, which was attended by

the Fund’s name giver, Prince Claus, as the Honorary Chairman, observed that the Fund has a good reputation and that he is very proud of this1.

Communication in the Netherlands must continually be a point for attention, but consideration must also be given to the limited resources available for communication by the Fund. This cannot be compared with broad development assistance organisations2. Given the limited resources available and the nature of the Fund’s field of activity, the communication strategy must focus on specific, interested target groups. The website could also contribute to publicity of the variety (breadth) of the Fund’s own activities and the activities supported by it.

The link with the Royal Family gives the Fund a specific character. It guarantees a certain amount of attention in the media and leads to a somewhat elite stamp for the Prince Claus Fund. It also gives the Fund a certain prestige, which contributes to the intangible effects identified by laureates and beneficiaries.

The committee observes that familiarity with the Fund amongst the political and administrative target group and the involvement of this group are currently insufficient. Communication with those involved from these groups appears not to have had the desired effect. In the opinion of the committee, the Fund should establish contact with this group at least once a year, and it could also propose that beneficiary projects be included in the itinerary of official trips to countries where the Fund is active, just as they used to for the Minister. When further focusing its communication strategy on specific, interested target groups, the Fund must also consider potential sponsors and private donors.

1. Minutes of the General Board Meeting, 9 November 2001.2. At Oxfam/Novib, for example, approximately 50 people are employed for publicity and marketing activities, in comparison with two at the PCF.


5.1.5 PosiTioning of The fUndThe Fund occupies a specific place amongst Dutch

organisations. With the exception of Hivos (Hivos Cultuurfonds) and the DOEN Foundation [Stichting Doen] (sustainable development, culture and media), very few development-oriented organisations are active in the field of culture and development. The Hivos Cultuurfonds, which is the most similar to the Prince Claus Fund, has criteria for the choice of activities to be supported that more clearly reflect the priorities that apply for development assistance, e.g. social development, and looks for cultural projects with broad accessibility. In the first 10 years of its existence, the Prince Claus Fund deliberately maintained a distance from the traditional development assistance organisations. However, in the period under review, the Fund has collaborated with specialised art and culture funds and other institutions.

For the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, its relationship with the Fund is special, because it is based on equality. Control by the Ministry is minimal; although proper consultation does occur at an administrative level, it occurs less between the Fund and the Minister. The subsidy paid to the Prince Claus Fund forms a relatively important part of the funds available for policy on culture and development (€ 3.5 million of a total budget of almost € 10 million). As a result, the Fund is one of the most important channels for implementation of this policy by the Cultural Cooperation, Education and Research Department/International Culture Policy (DCO/IC).

The Fund appears to be relatively unknown, even amongst parties in its field of activity. Most laureates have not heard of the Fund before they have dealings with it; beneficiaries learn of the Fund when they start to actively look for support. Within the Netherlands, familiarity with the Fund amongst a broader public would seem to be limited to the awards and other big events. Members of the Lower House who are involved in culture and development have not responded to a written questionnaire, which leads the committee to conclude that the Fund

does not have their attention to a sufficient extent. In a professional circle, representatives from the cultural sector in particular have followed the Fund, often right from the start. Others, working in development assistance organisations, or for foreign cultural institutions without any prior connection, often know the Fund by name, but have little substantive knowledge of it. The committee concludes that the positioning of the Fund focuses more on the international ‘culture’ policy field than on the ‘development assistance’ policy field.

5.2 effiCienCyorganisaTionThe fund has grown in recent years, but is still a

relatively small organisation. Just like all small organisations, the Fund is vulnerable when core staff leave, particularly the Director. This is already a point for attention for the Director and the Board. Partly for this reason, two middle-management positions were created in the evaluation period, which are intended to give the organisation more stability and continuity. The Board structure and advisory structure were also organised during the evaluation period. The distinction between day-to-day and general management has been abolished and the number of advisory committees has been reduced, as a result of which each programme no longer has its own international advisory committee. The commit-tee is positive about these reorganisations. It advises that further transparency be pursued through the introduction of the Cultural Governance code.

The large number of good and interesting applications has led to the better management of this process, by adopting more and better procedures and by standardising and monitoring processes. There have now been two occasions when the Fund was no longer able to accept applications because of a lack of resources; the last time was in 2006. The Fund is considering how it could manage this better, by being more strict in terms of selection, on the one hand, and by looking at ways to introduce a number of submission rounds with fixed deadlines, on the other


hand. The administrative process surrounding approved activities and the conclusion and monitoring of contracts, is efficient and does not overshadow the content. A substantial activity database is managed with a limited number of staff and in close collaboration with the external administrator.

The Fund is looking for an evaluation method for its projects. The evaluation committee appreciates this. With the development of an evaluation method of this nature, the Fund will be able to gain a following in the cultural and culture and development sectors.

exTernal ConTaCTsContacts between the Fund and the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs, including the embassy network, are satisfactory. At an international level, the Netherlands and the Prince Claus Fund are regularly asked to share their experiences. Outside the Netherlands, just the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland and the European Commission are active in this policy field. A trend is observable towards more international (European) collaboration.

adMinisTraTive organisaTion and finanCesThe Prince Claus Fund uses a ‘description of the

administrative organisation’ [Beschrijving van de Administratieve Organisatie] for the administrative process. This description is updated by the external administrator on a regular basis. The committee concludes that, given the size of the organisation, this has been organised satisfactorily. The most important powers and procedures have been documented. Duty separation has been put in place where necessary, as a result of which important payments are effected on the basis of the dual authorisation principle. The management information arising from the administration is detailed and provides a good insight into money flows, particularly in terms of project utilisation.

As regards substantiation of the financial contribution from the government and funds, the external (unqualified) audit opinion will be modified in line with the requirements stipulated by the Minister for

Development Cooperation (DGIS auditing guidelines). As regards the continuity reserve present, based on the committee’s findings, the Board of the Prince Claus Fund has decided to increase this reserve, so that it is no longer on the lower side of the range prescribed. Information on the existing pension scheme for staff will be added to the financial annual report for 2006. A management letter from the external accountant, last requested in 2003, will be requested again for financial year 2006.

In the subsidy agreement with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the overhead has been maximised at 20%. In practice, the overhead has been between 15% to 16% in recent years. This level of overhead is due in part to the fact that the Fund not only operates passively as a donor, but also actively initiates projects and operates subject to its own responsibility and with its own staff. The committee believes that the object should be to achieve an overhead of 15%, without affecting the performance of the Fund in essence. However, it advises that the current agreement between the Fund and the Ministry, i.e. a maximum of 20%, be maintained at the current time.

sTraTegiC visionIn the Vision for the Future, the Fund characterises

itself as a ‘network organisation with resources’. This is a reflection of the Fund’s wish to be more than a funder of cultural activities in or in relation to developing countries. Besides being a funder, the Fund wants to be a core part of a network of North-South and South-South contacts and it wants to become an expertise centre in the field of culture and development. The committee shares this strategic vision with the Fund. As an expertise centre, the Fund will have a clear position and added value amongst organisations that focus on collaboration with developing countries.

The original idea to make the CER programme an independent organisation, in collaboration with ICBS, has never been achieved. The embedding of the programme in the Fund with a coordinator, assisted by a steering group, will suffice.


The Fund imposes few geographic boundaries on itself, although, in principle, it does limit its activities to the 152 so-called DAC countries. However, it is seeking alignment with the activities of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in particular. The broad geographic approach is in line with the Fund’s objective. Geographic concentration would detract from this objective.

5.3 sUsTainabiliTyThe resources available to the Prince Claus Fund

currently consist of the long-term support provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the subsidy from the National Postal Code Lottery. Added to this, the Fund receives activity-related support from various sources. Its relationship with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is a special one. On the one hand, the Fund is financially dependent on the Ministry, while on the other hand, the Ministry has an interest in the Fund’s expertise, reputation and independence. The committee believes that the government must continue to fund the Fund, a role that is clearly different to a sponsor, in the sense that it must guarantee the continuity of the organisation. Should the Fund have more far-reaching ambitions than permitted by this government funding, it must obtain the financial resources for this itself. This already applies for the funding of the Sahel Opera. The CER programme could possibly also be attractive for financing by companies and other private parties.

The contribution from the National Postal Code Lottery is important, but is of a different nature than the funding received from the government. It makes a valuable contribution to activities undertaken by the Fund. A continuation of the support provided by the National Postal Code Lottery does provide stability as regards the activities undertaken, but the sustainability of the Fund cannot be made to depend on this.

Since the Prince Claus Fund operates both actively and passively as a fund and also has fund-raising status, it is different to other cultural funds in the Netherlands, which have a statutory embedding1 (the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science: including

1. Cultural Policy (Specific Cultural Policy Act) [Wet op het specifiek culturebeleid].2. Policy document Verschil Maken, Herijking culturenota systematiek, September 2005; Kunst van Leven, main outlines of cultural policy, June 2007.

the Mondriaan Foundation [Mondriaan Stichting], the Netherlands Foundation for Visual Arts, Design and Architecture [Fonds Beeldende Kunsten, Vormgeving en Bouwkunst], the Dutch Foundation for Literature [Fonds voor de Letteren], the Fund for Creative Music [Fonds voor de Scheppende Toonkunst], the Netherlands Film Fund [Nederlands Fonds voor de Film], the Netherlands Architecture Fund [Stimuleringsfonds voor Architectuur], etc.). A similar sustainable relationship with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but not enshrined in law, would improve the continuity of the Prince Claus Fund and, as such, its likelihood of maintaining and expanding the expertise obtained by it. One possibility would be the institution of a permanent or long-term decision (such as the current 10-year decision) with a periodic assessment to be effected once every five years, in the form of a review for example, by analogy with the long-term subsidy perspective to be introduced in the cultural sectors, as part of the new subsidy system, as of 20092. The Fund’s current autonomy can be retained as much as possible.

5.4 reCoMMendaTionsBased on its findings, the evaluation committee has

two recommendations.

1. worK on ConTinUiTy and sUsTainabiliTyThe Prince Claus Fund fills a niche in the whole of

organisations in the field of development assistance. To be able to fulfil its role properly, the Fund is moving towards the role of expertise centre. To be able to gain and retain the expertise needed to do this, continuity will be needed. The Fund’s activities clearly lie in the public domain. Therefore, the core part of its funding must come from public funds. The current long-term subsidy agreement with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs offers a certain degree of continuity. The committee recommends that the need for continuity, which is necessary to guarantee that the expertise required is actually developed and maintained, is allowed to play an explicit role in the design of the future financial relationship between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Fund.


To do this, it is important that political and admini-strative players in the field of development assistance and culture are persuaded of the importance of the Fund’s objectives and activities. The Fund must explicitly take this into consideration in its communication strategy and positioning. Therefore, the committee’s recommendations include the recommendation that the Director and the Chairman of the Board meet with the Minister for Develop-ment Cooperation at least once every year. Besides this, regular contacts with members of the Upper House and the Lower House are advisable too, as well as with the National Committee for International Cooperation and Sustainable Development [Nationale Commissie voor Internationale Samenwerking en Duurzame Ontwikkeling (NCDO)] and migrant organisations, etc., in order to increase social support.

In addition to the sustainability of the Fund as an organisation, a long-term relationship with network partners could promote the positioning of the Fund in the international field regarding culture and development. In continuation of the existing network partnerships, support from the network partners in the fields of management/organisation and fundraising is another factor.

Efficiency also contributes to the sustainability of the organisation. At the current time, overhead costs represent approximately 15% to 16% of the budget. The evaluation committee considers an overhead of 15% reasonable for an expertise centre and a Fund that both supports activities and initiates and implements them itself.

2. More inTensive CollaboraTive relaTionshiPs wiTh oTher organisaTions

Since the Fund has now developed its own role, it is able to intensify collaboration with a number of organisations both in the Netherlands and with European and multilateral organisations, and can do so based on its own clear position. The committee sees possibilities for the Fund to take on the role of expertise centre and initiator in the field of culture

and development. The committee particularly recommends that the fund explore possibilities for more intensive collaboration with development organisations. However, this will require that the Fund provide a more practical clarification of its concept of ‘culture and development’. The committee feels that it would be possible to further operationalise the concept currently applied without having to limit the wealth of activities currently supported in practice.

A follow-up to the 2002 Roses in the Desert [Rozen in de Woestijn] conference on culture and development, possibly in collaboration with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other culture and development organisations, could bring this subject further into the spotlight, but this time in a broader forum. A conference of this nature could also lead to a further explication or specification of objectives and to the formulation of criteria in line with the policy pursued by the Fund to date. However, the Fund must ensure that the current level of flexibility can be retained.

KOCHxBOS STUDIO AMSTERDAM

the prince claus fund - government.nl · tor terms of reference. ... the prince claus fund for...

Documents