Natasha Feiner is Interim Head of Policy and Influencing at Impact on Urban Health, with previous roles at Independent Age and the British Heart Foundation.
We worked with Natasha on public affairs, policy positioning, and policy development over a 12-month period.
Tom: How did you first hear about us?
Natasha: I first heard about Cast from Clay because you’d been doing a piece of work on policy options for our Financial Foundations of Adult Health programme, looking at where they might go next. Colleagues sung your praises in terms of being able to challenge, but also being really brilliant at delivering high quality work.
Tom: What did you want support on? And why us?
Natasha: There were a few. The immediate challenge was a capacity gap in the team. We wanted support on some of the doing, to come in and be a part of the team. Then there were wider challenges around how we position ourselves as an organisation and increasing our brand profile. And I guess a third on integrity as an organisation on policy issues relating to our wider work.
As to why hire you, well, we spoke to maybe four or five organisations. One of the things that stood out to me and Mark was that first of all Cast from Clay had a really solid recommendation from someone saying that they can do the work; they have solid policy expertise. And they have a real range of different political opinions on the team, which is something that is really important to us as a charity, to ensure that we’re in line with Charity Commission guidelines.
It was really very helpful on the project to have that range of political perspectives on the team—as a sector we don’t always have that much diversity of political thought. People were able to say, ‘from my perspective working in this space in this party, this is not going to go down well with this audience’, or ‘we might need to think about reframing this in that way’. The explicit way in which you approach it as an organisation was very useful.
One of the things that came through even when you were responding to the tender is that you were prompting us to think differently and challenge some of our ingrained ways of thinking and working. That is something that has been hugely valuable. We could have worked with loads of other organisations that could have just done the work, but being able to challenge us constructively set you apart.
Tom: What was the day-to-day like?
Natasha: We found the team incredibly responsive to anything that we wanted. But what I really valued was the extent to which you, Jamie, Johnny and Danny very quickly started to feel like part of our team, and that we could come to you with ideas, but also vice versa, and that we were then able to have a conversation about whether we should take something forward, and if so how, and what the best tactic would be and where we might prioritise or focus.
It was a really energising and personalised approach—it felt like you really got us, our mission and how we work, which I don’t think is a straightforward thing to do.
Tom: What were the proof points that that way of working delivered?
Natasha: I can look at our political monitoring database and you can see the difference in the number of decision makers we started to build relationships with before and after we worked with you. It is staggering the difference in the amount of outreach we were doing, but also the types of relationships we were building and starting to have some of that back and forth with them.
On the more vibes-based side, there’s been a real shift in how decision makers are responding to us. We are getting many more responses than we used to. Part of that is just because we’re doing more of it, but it’s also that we have a clearer offer, and that’s a result of a lot of the work we did together on policy positioning.
Maybe it’s not a proof point of success, but the actual doing of the work is an important aspect, and that felt really enjoyable and rigorous and challenging in a good way.
Tom: You’ve referenced us challenging you a few times in this conversation. What would you say to someone who may be reading this and thinking ‘I don’t know how much I want to be challenged’?
Natasha: I would encourage people to take the opportunity to get another perspective and to get some honest reflections on approach, methodology, vision, and communication style. Sometimes when you’re in an organisation and you’ve been in that organisation for a while, you have a default way of conceptualising things and doing things.
Often that is fine, but that’s not going to help you get to the next level. We wanted to grow, we wanted to build our brand profile and improve our reputation and credibility. And having an external perspective to think critically about how we work and whether we are setting ourselves up for success… it’s just very valuable.
I’d also reassure that the Cast from Clay team is very kind in how you approach challenge. You’re not coming in and telling us that we don’t know what we’re doing or what we’re wrong. You have a range of perspectives in the team that we don’t necessarily have, and the approach you take is collaborative and clearly aligned with mission.
Tom: What advice would you give someone thinking about working with us?
Natasha: If you’re an organisation that has a capacity gap and you need a team to come in immediately and get up to speed on something policy, public affairs or strategic comms, I would be very confident approaching Cast from Clay.
But also, if you have a bigger, more meta, more thinky problem that you might not even know how to articulate yourself yet, they’re a good bunch to talk to about it.
If you want to read another review, the next is with Elli Moody, Director of Policy & Advocacy at CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England. If you would like to have an initial conversation with Tom, our CEO, to discuss a potential engagement, you can book a 15 minute call.