How can International US Health and Indigenous Foundations build their capacity to fund health in remote and rural Australian Indigenous communities?

How can International US Health and Indigenous Foundations build their capacity to fund health in remote and rural Australian Indigenous communities?

This study explores the capacity of the United States (US) Foundation's international health investment to remote and rural Australian Indigenous people. It does this primarily through the application of appreciative inquiry tools to the 'giving' culture within US Foundation's venture philanthropy. It examines the US and Australian philanthropic hegemonic history to provide a reference point for exploring what greater cross-cultural engagement could mean to US Foundation‘s international Indigenous health giving.

There is much evidence of lower life expectancy by remote and rural Australian Indigenous people. Deserving Indigenous grantseeker's projects that seek holistic health including human rights are not resonating with US Foundations. Indigenous people's environmental stewardship and actions to progress reconciliation and restoration lacks true recognition. While the common practice of US grantmakers co-opting Indigenous grantseekers to become more culturally homogenous with the rest of society is disturbing.

There is little research on the hegemonic ideology behind venture philanthropy's health funding agenda of public health disease intervention through social entrepreneurship models. This is concerning as it promotes the rhetoric that international intermediaries administration is more efficient than direct funding. In light of such systemic anomalies, a suggested way forward is for US Foundations to return to catalyst funding principles of change through health promotion projects. New Shared Indigenous Giving Principles and a Compact of Understanding were created as examples for peak Indigenous philanthropic organisations like Philanthropy Australia and International Funders of Indigenous People for possible inclusion in their health promotion strategy of building capacity through education and advocacy.

The study's outcomes also suggest a First Nation's Entrepreneurship as a new type of entrepreneurship, a way forward that could bridge venture philanthropy's driver style to a return to partner and catalyst philanthropy. It could reside alongside social entrepreneurship, increasing Indigenous health funding that values Indigenous holistic aspects for health including human rights as Social Entrepreneurship does for social justice rights. This vision could warrant further research on social entrepreneurship synchronicity with the Bangkok Charter for Health Promotion in a Globalised World and the Social Determinants of Health.