Doing Better with Less: How Philanthropy Can Make Smarter, Evidence-Informed Investment Choices

On Monday 27 April, Building Evidence in Education (BE²) and the Zenex Foundation convened funders, researchers, and practitioners for a discussion on Doing Better with Less: How Philanthropy Can Make Smarter, Evidence-Informed Investment Choices.

The session focused on a practical and increasingly urgent question: how can funders make better decisions in a context of constrained resources, while maximising impact, affordability, and scale?

Across the discussion, a clear theme emerged. The challenge is not simply to generate more evidence. It is to strengthen how evidence informs real-world decisions, particularly in complex education systems where resources are limited, trade-offs are unavoidable, and implementation conditions matter.

Moving from project-level impact to system-level change

Fatima Adam of the Zenex Foundation challenged the idea that impact sits neatly within individual projects. Instead, she emphasised that impact emerges at the system level through sustained partnerships with government, a thoughtful mix of pilots and larger-scale programmes, and continuous cycles of learning and adaptation.

Her reflections underscored the importance of embedding evidence within long-term system change, rather than treating evidence as something attached only to standalone initiatives. For philanthropy, this means thinking not only about whether a specific programme “works,” but also about how evidence can help strengthen the relationships, capacities, and decision-making processes that enable change over time.

Matching evidence to a programme’s stage of development

Tisha Verma of the Education Endowment Foundation focused on the importance of aligning evidence to a programme’s stage of development.

Early-stage interventions may require iteration, feedback, and learning about feasibility. More mature programmes may require more rigorous testing and evidence of effectiveness under real-world conditions. In both cases, evidence needs to be fit for purpose.

She also highlighted the importance of understanding implementation, planning for scale from the outset, and translating findings into clear, practical insights that decision-makers can use. Evidence is more likely to influence decisions when it speaks directly to the choices funders, governments, and implementers need to make.

Three shifts for funders

Deborah Greebon of BE² presented three shifts that can help funders make smarter evidence-informed investment choices.

First, funders may need to move from asking only “what works?” to asking “what is a smart buy?” This requires greater attention to cost-effectiveness, affordability, feasibility, and the conditions under which an intervention can be implemented at scale.

Second, implementation considerations should be treated as a core evidence question, not a secondary consideration. Understanding not only if an intervention can work, but also whether it can be delivered well, by whom, at what cost, and under what conditions is central to decision-making.

Third, the sector needs to focus more deliberately on how existing knowledge is accessed, interpreted, and applied. This includes exploring how AI may support evidence synthesis and uptake, while keeping human judgement, contextual understanding, and relationships at the centre.

The discussion was chaired by Gail Campbell of the Zenex Foundation, who also brought in reflections from Zenex’s Strategy 2023.

Common challenges and trade-offs

Participants reflected on several common challenges. Even where strong research exists, translating it into action remains difficult. Barriers include competing priorities, political pressures, limited capacity, and the realities of working within complex systems.

Co-creation with governments and practitioners was seen as critical to improving relevance, ownership, and uptake. Evidence is more useful when decision-makers and implementers help shape the questions, interpret the findings, and consider what they mean for action.

The conversation also highlighted important trade-offs. Generating high-quality evidence, particularly for marginalised groups, can be costly and time-intensive. This raises difficult questions about value for money and about when to invest in new evidence, when to adapt existing knowledge, and when to focus on strengthening the conditions for evidence use.

At the same time, many funders rely on existing research as a public good rather than investing directly in new evidence generation. This creates a collective challenge for the sector: how to ensure that the evidence base continues to grow, remains relevant, and is accessible to those making decisions.

What does this mean for philanthropy?

The discussion reinforced the need to prioritise evidence that is usable, implementable, and relevant to decision-making contexts. Philanthropy is uniquely positioned to absorb risk, support innovation, and create space for learning.

However, doing better with less requires going beyond funding studies alone. It depends on investing in the conditions that enable evidence to be used, including stronger partnerships, ongoing dialogue, learning infrastructure, and collective approaches to problem-solving.

For BE², the conversation also pointed to a growing agenda around evidence uptake, responsible AI, and the practical use of existing knowledge. As education actors face tighter resources and more complex choices, the ability to access, interpret, and apply evidence well will become even more important.

Want to collaborate?

BE² is keen to connect with funders, evidence intermediaries, researchers, and government partners who are exploring responsible AI for evidence synthesis or evidence uptake.

If you are interested or willing to share what you are learning, please get in touch at be2_admin@building-evidence-in-education.org.