Our idea was simple if a little unorthodox for the development world: Let communities choose their path and we follow. It was designed to be an antidote to the colonialist structures that run rampant in the space.

Yet, five years after The InteRoots Initiative began to much fanfare and much hope, we are closing shop and winding our operations down. We are not bitter; instead we are contemplative if a little worried about the future of development, philanthropy and fundraising. Yet, as always, hopeful for other organizations who can succeed in ways we did not. Today I am here to give some pointers and share some lessons learned so others can persevere where we were unable.

It is never easy to admit that a venture did not achieve its original vision. As a founder, it is especially difficult to rise above the emotions a wind-down elicits in light of all of the time, resources, and energy spent on the effort. That said, there are always lessons to be learned for the next venture, as well as insights to be shared with others embarking on similar paths.

• Nonprofits are inherently weak business structures. They are built to generate revenue only begrudgingly, yet require the same amount of money to run as any other business venture. They are also expected to operate with higher efficiency and under strict scrutiny with limited ability to expand beyond their original scope so as to expand their base of income. The fact that they do not provide any goods or services to those who provide revenue creates a dynamic where value must be demonstrated through abstraction and emotion. A donor has to feel good about parting with their money, although the tangible results of their investment are not direct. Unless a nonprofit starts with a significant endowment or with founders that can foot the start-up bill, there are few resources for start-ups in the sector to get off the ground. This results in less diversity of people and ideas, and often creates a culture of dependency on donors, who then have an inordinate influence on the way the company is run. Furthermore, a great deal of pressure is put on Founders in this context to generate income through charisma and evangelizing. This is no different from other start-ups in the for-profit space, but it is difficult to do when there is no profit-motive or “product” to be tested or supported by market forces.
• This is not to diminish the incredible generosity of people who support nonprofit work, especially those who make significant investments. The intent of presenting this dynamic is mainly to show the additional barriers that nonprofits face, especially those that may be considered start-ups. A nonprofit, although held to the same, if not higher, standards of a business, is expected to operate in a way that is contrary to the catalysts built into our free-market system. This is unless the organization breaks into a space that operates beyond capitalist ideals. This is why nonprofits are built to cater to individuals who have income that is expendable and often give a great deal of latitude to those same individuals in exercising influence over how the business is run.
• InteRoots was built to consciously challenge these dynamics and place power in the hands of the communities it serves. We intentionally created decision-making structures that were community-centered and insulated from the influences of donors. Our Board of Directors was also built to represent members of the communities we serve first and foremost, restructuring board priorities and composition so that the organization was not directed only by those who were giving money. On the whole, the approach was incredibly successful when it came to the projects. Initiatives were more efficient, accountable, and were embraced by the communities they served. Most importantly, our pilot project was able to achieve financial autonomy – something rare in the nonprofit space that focuses on cycles of giving as sources of income. This was because we did not place limits on the income generating ideas of the project; we insulated it from the anti-market characteristics of nonprofits.
• Over our five years, we were able to generate a great group of supporters who agreed with our approach and message. The need to educate donors on the approach required significant resources. Ultimately, however, we were unable to scale our income effectively. Once start-up funds from founders were expended, there just wasn’t the ability to maintain operations on the organizational side. This was mainly due to the fact that partnerships with larger funders did not materialize. It is hard to analyze exactly where we fell short. We certainly could have done more to keep the organization afloat, but we also found it hard to find individuals interested in taking a chance on our method since we are a new organization with a novel approach. Understandably, since revenue is donation-based and accountable to nonprofit requirements by law, investment is highly risk-averse and scarce. The lesson here is that although our goal was to challenge colonial dynamics in philanthropy, our unwillingness to lean into existing fundraising strategies employed by nonprofits was our undoing. We believed we could find a route in-between the worlds, but did not pay enough attention to the fact that the nonprofit space is not built to support disruption. It may accommodate innovative elements, but those elements will need to have pre-existing financial backing to make a backing to succeed. In short, in nonprofits, it is not enough to be the change you want to see. If your vision does not match fundraising norms in the space, then you will not survive as a public charity.
• In the end, we are proud that our programming was so successful, and look forward to exploring how our approach may be usable across the industry. We are grateful that our projects are also at a juncture where a cessation of operations would not impact their continued work and growth. InteRoots was only built to provide short-term, “incubation” support in the first place, and we are pleased to see it accomplished that task. Currently, we are working on a book to document all that was accomplished as well as provide a forum to discuss the successes and shortcomings of the initative. We are hopeful this project will allow for a meaningful discourse and may even sprout new roots for the organization; there is plenty more to coax from the soil. 

---