The Foundation for Rural & Regional Renewal (FRRR, phonetically F-triple-R) is the only national foundation specifically focused on ensuring social and economic strength in rural, regional & remote areas of Australia by aligning government, philanthropic and local community purpose and investment. Through well-informed investment in people and organisations that are in and of their place, we believe we can stimulate ideas that lead to actions, both big and small, and drive vitality.
Sarah Matthee is FRRR’s Climate Solutions Portfolio Lead, she is passionate about the need to adapt and mitigate in response to a changing climate, and strives to ensure communities have agency in decision-making, and the resources they need, to lead a just transition. Sarah is a lawyer and chemical engineer and spends her weekends ensconced in her partner’s sourdough business at local farmers markets.
In 2023, FRRR established a new granting program, entitled Community Led Climate Solutions (CLCS), which seeks to support not-for-profit organisations across remote, rural and regional Australian communities to act locally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help address the impacts of climate change for positive and sustainable environmental, social and economic outcomes.
Alexandra Williamson (AW): Where did the Community-Led Climate Solutions program originate? What were the conversations that were happening at the time?
Sarah Matthee (SM): Context wise, across Australia, we are seeing increasingly frequent disasters, and our climate is clearly changing. We know that rural and regional communities will be disproportionately impacted by climate change and that we each have a role to play in mitigation, adaptation and shaping our collective future.
So when we set FRRR’s 2020 – 2025 strategy, one pillar focused on disaster resilience and climate solutions. We deliberately used the words “climate solutions”, as we’re not questioning whether climate change is occurring or not, but instead focusing on how we can support communities to undertake activities that prepare, act, mitigate and adapt for what’s ahead.
And yet, when I looked at FRRR’s application data from across Australia (we get about 2,500 applications a year and make just over 1,100 grants, so there are always interesting insights), while there were a large number of applications for disaster recovery and preparedness, one thing that surprised me was not as many climate-focused applications as we might have anticipated. If we think about the reasons for that – we know that many communities have their hands full dealing with the here and now (mental health challenges locally, housing needs, drought impacts, maintaining current assets, etc.), and many are also grappling with conversations about climate, their role and the future challenges and opportunities for them locally.
By creating a standalone grant program, we were seeking to draw attention to the funding available for climate-focused work and encourage conversations across communities – not just those led by the environment or sustainability groups. It could be the local housing provider, an Aboriginal corporation seeking energy independence, or an agricultural association undertaking a pilot, and much more.
Through the program, we’re also curious to see the breadth of climate solutions that communities put forward and what that tells us about what communities are ready for, what’s appropriate in different community contexts, and how it affects change. We have kept the program extremely broad and are asking community organisations to articulate why their project is a climate solution for them. The situation is going to be different for every community, and so what suits one town won’t necessarily be right for another, but we’re interested in backing local solutions and being able to demonstrate to others (including government, philanthropy and business), how broad support that can be applied flexibly, is necessary, important and powerful.
AW: Do you see Community Led Climate Solutions as being distinctive even within FRRR? Is it a new direction for the organisation, or a deliberate focusing and attracting of attention
SM: FRRR is known for having a mix of broad small grants and focused programs. Our small grants program, Strengthening Rural Communities, is always open for applications and makes grants quarterly, for a variety of charitable activities – everything from supporting a beautiful arts-focused lantern festival that brings people together, to a feasibility study for a mountain bike track that could bring significant tourism to town, to air conditioners in the local hall that’s becoming stifling in summer. We see great insights through that program, and it often highlights areas of unmet need that we then talk to government, philanthropy, and business about – whether to inform the development of policy or to highlight gaps that need addressing. On the other hand, many of our focused programs target particular themes, such as mental health through our ‘In A Good Place’ program, or digital inclusion through a partnership with Telstra delivering a Connected Communities grant program. So, externally it might look quite distinctive and different. But internally it’s reflective of the qualitative and quantitative evidence-led approach to FRRR’s program evolution.
AW: I’m interested in whether the program has, in the way you’re framing it, a ten, twenty, or fifty-year time horizon? Or because it is indeed the Community Led Climate Solutions program, whether the applications are more focused on the here and now?
SM: We’re currently seeing more applications for short-term projects that are focused on the conversations, changes and installations that can be made now. They’ll have an ongoing impact, but are less about what might be needed across a twenty or fifty-year horizon. But that’s also probably reflective of the way we’re asking the questions and seeking grantees to acquit twelve months after receiving their grant. We’re also not overplaying the impact that a $20,000 grant can have. I think it’s a really important and beneficial amount of money but we aren’t seeking sole attribution for 20-year impacts from a single grant. However, each grant can build important momentum. We see organisations build capacity and capability that solves challenges and enables them to act as backbones of their community through disruption, and be the actors the community looks to lead change.
AW: I know that you haven’t yet announced your second round of grants, though applications have closed. Is there a shift between the applications you got from round one and round two?
SM: In round one we saw a great range of activities – from local education and events designed to build awareness, to conservation, the installation of solar panels and batteries, enhancing capabilities needed to lead the development of a microgrid, to circular recycling, food security through community gardens, and much more. In terms of applications, there was a high proportion on the Eastern seaboard – and while that accords with population spread generally, I’m particularly interested in the extent to which activities proposed are different across the different States, but also from a coastal vs inland context. This round, we’ve got a good spread of activities that we’re assessing right now, and we’ve got a better geographic spread. It was nice to see a greater number of applications from Western Australia, and a few from South Australia. We did some targeted marketing to try and encourage that, too.
AW: One objective within the program is called “Just Transitions”. I’m interested in how you overlay different lenses over the program itself such as cultural backgrounds, people with disability, gender, and age. Given the building awareness of the disproportionate impact of climate on different identities and demographic groups within a community, how does that play into the program?
SM: It’s something that we are very conscious of in the projects that we’re putting forward to be funded. Firstly, FRRR’s strategic focus areas preference support for: growing and investing in the next generation of regional Australians; First Nations self-determination; outback/remove liveability; supporting regions through transitions – economic energy, land use, etc; and climate adaptation and solutions. Then, when we’re assessing the projects, we are asking questions about the need for the project, who the local partners are, who they represent, how are they engaged, who the project seeks to reach, what measures there are to ensure inclusion across the community, and also what is more appropriate to have a narrow focus in order to benefit to those who often miss out.
AW: Have there been potholes, or times where you’ve been going along merrily when all of a sudden, oops! As in, have things come up unexpectedly that have forced you to stop and say, we need to think about this or do this differently?
SM: Yes, when writing the program guidelines, language was something that we were really conscious of. The climate sector can be a space that has a lot of jargon, acronyms, and language that means different things to different people. We reached out to a number of people as we developed our guidelines and website material because it needs to make sense at a community level, and is something we will continue to iterate, based on the feedback we receive.
And then our individual biases and assumptions are something that we continue to check ourselves against. If a community organisation is putting forward an application, I’m trying to firmly put myself in their shoes rather than bring my opinions and past experiences into analysing the project. We have some pretty robust conversations across our assessment team and Program Advisory Committee on that basis, which I always look forward to, as it strengthens the process and the outcomes.
AW: What makes you smile when you think about the program?
SM: Just thinking about the organisations and activities that the program supports that might not have been supported otherwise. Grantees tell us that it’s hard for them to find funding in this space, particularly for those who do not have charity registration or tax deductibility. Also, just the breadth of ways in which volunteers across rural and regional Australia are leading change. Our grants are just a small step along that journey, but they can be just what is needed. Reading their applications and final reports, and chatting to folk about what they’re up to, makes me smile every time.
AW: Now that the program is up and running, what’s next on your plate?
SM: We’ve just closed round 2 of the program, so are busy with assessments. Outside of this work, we’ve been having discussions about evaluation, so that we can track the grants and program impact, and also seek to continually improve the program.
I’m also looking at our potential impact outside of the grant program. How can the FRRR’s structure be of most service to rural communities in the climate solution space? There are lots of great conversations underway.