Impact & accountability

Section: Our purpose

Why we exist

Moonland exists to amplify the measurable impact of organizations committed to making a positive change.

We do that by democratizing access to the digital systems behind critical internal processes; making them transparent, understandable, and owned by the teams who depend on them. Not locked behind technical complexity. Not dependent on us.

We chose this focus deliberately. Building digital systems for organizations committed to positive change is not the obvious commercial decision. We made it anyway, because we think intention alone is not enough: real progress happens when purpose is paired with systems that enable transparency, ownership and control.

That runs in two directions. We amplify the impact of the organizations we work with, and we hold ourselves to having a real positive impact on society and the environment through the way we run and operate this company. The second half is now written into our articles of association.

‍

How that shows up in our decisions
‍

What we put in our articles

A commitment that outlasts us

In «month year» we changed Moonland's articles of association. One of the company's stated purposes is now to have a real positive impact on society and the environment, through our business operations and economic activities.

That is not decoration in a founding document. It changes how decisions have to be made. Our directors are required to weigh, for every significant decision and over both the short and the longer term, the interests of:

• our employees, the companies we work through, and our suppliers
• our clients
• the communities and the society in which we and our suppliers operate
• the local and global environment
• anyone else with a stake in what we do

None of those interests automatically outranks the others, including shareholder return. Weighing them is the work, not a tie-breaker we reach for when it happens to suit us.

We did this because we were already trying to operate this way, and because a commitment that survives a change of ownership is worth more than one that depends on who happens to be running the company.

‍

Human rights

We respect human rights, and we expect the same from the people we work with.

We support the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the core conventions of the International Labour Organization. At our size, that comes down to a handful of concrete things:

• Our own people, employees and freelancers alike, work under written agreements, with pay and benefits we can explain.
• We consider human rights when we choose suppliers and tools, not only price and features.
• We pay attention to what we build. Our systems often hold sensitive data about people in vulnerable situations. That is a responsibility, not a feature.
• Anyone who thinks we have got this wrong can tell us, including anonymously.

‍Raise a concern

We are a nine-person company. We are not going to claim that we audit a global supply chain. What we can do is make deliberate choices about who we work with and what we build, and be straight about it when we fall short.

‍

Diversity, equity and inclusion

Being small makes it tempting to treat inclusion as something to formalise later, at scale. We would rather build the habit now, while it is cheap.

What we commit to

• Hiring on structured criteria, with job descriptions written to widen the pool rather than narrow it.
• Reviewing our own policies through an inclusion lens as we write them, not as a later audit.
• Building accessible systems for our clients, and holding ourselves to the same standard.
• Publishing what we are actually doing, and whether it happened.

Accessibility

We rebuilt this website to WCAG 2.2 AA. It would be strange to sell systems that people can understand and own, and then ship a site that some of them cannot use.

We are extending the same standard to the systems we build with clients: keyboard navigation, readable contrast, proper labels, and documentation people can actually follow.

Current actions and progress

Simple two-column list. Update annually, this is the JEDI2.n "progress" requirement.

‍

Where we are being honest

At nine people, our team is not statistically representative of anything. We are not going to publish diversity percentages that swing eleven points every time one person joins or leaves. What we will publish is what we are doing and whether we did it.

‍

Responsible lobbying

We do not lobby.

No paid lobbyists, no political donations, no trade-association funding aimed at shifting legislation in our commercial interest. If that ever changes, this page changes first.

We do talk publicly about how impact organizations should build and own their systems — in talks, articles and sector events. We consider that a different activity from lobbying, but we would rather name it than leave you guessing.

If we ever do engage in public policy, these are the rules we hold ourselves to:

• We say who we are and who we represent. No front groups, no undisclosed funding.
• We only advocate for positions consistent with what is on this page.
• We publish it here.

‍

Collective action

Working beyond our own walls

Some of what we know is more useful shared than kept.

• Mentoring and knowledge sharing. We advise organizations and peers on operational structure and system design beyond paid engagements. «Name the concrete examples — who, roughly how often.»
• Sector contribution. «e.g. humanitarian technology work, conference talks, sector working groups. Pello's IFRC nomination and the Digital for Development 'iChoose' Prize belong here — they are evidence, not just credentials.»
• Open knowledge. We publish our thinking on structuring critical processes rather than keeping it as proprietary methodology. «Link to articles or resources.»

We track this internally so the claims on this page stay true.

‍

Raise a concern

Something not sitting right?
‍

If you think we are falling short of anything on this page, we would rather hear it than not. You can raise a concern anonymously.
‍

Raise a concern