Latest news with #MFF
Mint
a day ago
- Business
- Mint
Interview: Rahul Mehta of MFF on why India needs strategic philanthropy - 'you can't innovate without talent'
Founded in 1996 in Houston, Texas, in the United States, by the Mehta siblings—Nisha, Rahul, Jainesh, and Dharmesh—in honour of their parents Bhupat and Jyoti Mehta, the Mehta Family Foundation (MFF) is today a top philanthropic force strengthening India's knowledge infrastructure through transformative investments in higher education. With a firm belief that scientific and technological excellence is key to national progress, MFF partners today with top IITs to establish interdisciplinary schools focused on data science, biosciences, AI, health tech, and sustainability. With over 1,400 students currently enrolled across IITs at Madras, Guwahati, Roorkee, Kanpur, and Palakkad and a target of graduating 12,000 by 2031, MFF's collaborative model goes beyond traditional funding. Under the leadership of CEO Rahul Mehta, it shapes programs, recruits faculty, and aligns with long-term national goals. In India to announce two new schools at IIT Indore on July 22, Rahul Mehta spoke to LiveMint about the Mehta Family Foundation's journey, the state of academic philanthropy in India, and the road ahead. Excerpts from the interview: Q: Can you tell us about your background and how the Mehta Family Foundation started? A: I left India when I was 17. I didn't come from a wealthy or highly educated family—my parents had no formal education. But I worked hard, started multiple companies, and after selling my first one, I had more money than I ever thought I would need. I decided to start the Foundation. I've always believed I am just a steward of this wealth—my goal was to give it away meaningfully. Initially, I donated to small nonprofits, gave $500 here, $1000 there, even to Indian charities. But over time, I realised I needed to decide to donate where I felt the deepest impact. That's when my philanthropic journey became more focused on education and institution-building. Q: What was the first major project you funded in India? A: It started around 2005–06. On a trip to the Aurobindo Ashram, I stopped at IIT Madras and had a conversation with the then-director, Dr K Kasturirangan. We discussed their vision, and that led to the creation of the School of Biosciences and Bioengineering—the first such school I funded. Later, in 2010, they returned asking for support to expand lab space, animal hubs, and research infrastructure, which became our second project at IIT Madras. So we've supported two major projects there. Q: How did you choose the areas of focus—Bio, AI, Sustainability? A: I looked at trends in US academia. By the early 2000s, half of engineering faculty in the US were shifting their focus to healthcare and bio. But Indian campuses hadn't even considered biosciences yet—they still offered only traditional disciplines like mechanical or chemical engineering. Similarly, I saw that Indian institutions were slow to adopt AI and data science. In 2018–19, I even hosted a meeting in Delhi with several IIT directors to pitch data science and AI schools—no one was interested. Then came ChatGPT and suddenly everyone saw its relevance. The same is happening now with sustainability. I havve been pushing for formal education in this space for the last three years. We need a new generation of talent explicitly trained in sustainability. Q: You have been talking about the 12,000 deep-tech graduates goal. What does that mean? A: Across eight schools we've funded so far, each school typically includes BTech, MTech, and PhD programs. A typical school has: ● 40–60 BTech seats per year → 160–240 BTech students at steady state ● 50–75 master's students With a firm belief that scientific and technological excellence is key to national progress, MFF partners today with top IITs to establish interdisciplinary schools focused on data science, biosciences, AI, health tech, and sustainability. Every school supports around 300–400 students. With eight schools, that's over 3000 students in steady-state enrollment—equivalent to the size of a new IIT. If you project this over 10 years, it adds up to over 10,000–12,000 graduates, which is critical for India's intellectual and innovation capacity. Q: Are these schools integrated into existing IITs or independent? A: They're integrated within existing IITs but are independently funded and branded—like the Mehta Family School of Data Science and AI. So far, we've supported biosciences, AI, and sustainability schools. Each has its own set of faculty, curriculum, and students. Q: What is your long-term vision for the Foundation in India? A: To help India build a critical mass of intellectual talent across future-critical areas. For example, one school in sustainability isn't enough. We probably need three or four. Public health is another area I'd like to enter. The idea is to look at long-term capacity creation—not just short-term programs. Q: Are there specific challenges in setting up these departments in India? A: Many. The philanthropic ecosystem isn't as mature as the West. In India, people still ask: 'Why do you want to give us money?' Universities often don't know how to write proposals. Even when they agree, internal processes like Senate approvals, faculty alignment, curriculum design—it all takes 18 months or more. In contrast, if I offer money to Harvard, I get a proposal in 24 hours, and they fly out to meet me. Q: So it's a 10+ year commitment to build each department? A: Absolutely. From planning, curriculum design, faculty recruitment, to graduating the first batch—it's easily a decade-long journey. But that's what strategic philanthropy requires: focus, patience, and long-term commitment. Q: How do you assess the impact of your work—what keeps you going? A: The students. When I visit campuses, I meet them in classrooms and ask about their lives. Most come from small towns I have never heard of. Many are the first in their family to go to college. Getting a job post-graduation changes their lives—and their families. That's what keeps me going. One student's transformation is enough to justify all the effort. But here, we're talking about thousands. Q: Do you worry about brain drain—will these students stay in India? A: I don't dictate that. They should do what's best for them. But global forces are shifting—many will stay in India because opportunities here are growing. The goal is to empower them to lead wherever they are. Q: Where does India stand in the innovation economy today? A: We're just beginning. Our innovation capacity has to scale massively. Take healthcare—MD Anderson Cancer Centre in Houston, US, has more cancer researchers than all of India combined. In battery tech, China and the US are far ahead. We must build deep talent pools in these sectors to compete. You can't innovate without talent. You can't innovate without talent. Q: And where do you see philanthropy in India going from here? A: It's getting better. Compared to 2006, people are now more welcoming, more appreciative. But strategic philanthropy is still rare. Many want quick wins—whereas real impact, like building academic institutions, takes 15–20 years. You have to pick one mission and stick to it. That's what we are doing.
Euronews
3 days ago
- Business
- Euronews
EU seeks to triple entry fee for short-term visa-exempt visitors
The European Commission has proposed bumping the fee for visa-exempt travellers arriving in the bloc for short stays from €7 to €20, a senior EU official has confirmed. Visa exempt travel is set to be available from the last quarter of 2026 through the 'European Travel Information and Authorisation System' (ETIAS) to 30 European countries—namely, all EU member states except Ireland, plus Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein, and Switzerland. An ETIAS authorisation is required for short-term stays (up to 90 days) in these countries by nationals of visa-exempt states such as the UK, US, Canada, Brazil, and Australia. The new ETIAS fee system will be assigned to the EU budget. Currently, the cost for visa exempt arrival is set at €7 for applicants, with exemptions for those under 18 or over 70 years old at the time of application. However, the European Commission now wants to triple the fee to €20 in order to raise additional funds. The proposal accompanies the presentation of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), the EU's long-term budget for the period 2028–2034, which foresees a significant increase in revenues generated through so-called 'own resources'—that is, taxes collected at EU level. In addition to five new own resources proposals pitched by the Commission last week, plans to raise the ETIAS fee are set to generate an additional €300 million per year. The Commission has submitted the proposal to the Council and the European Parliament, which have to endorse it, the senior official said. Unlike other own resources, the increase in the ETIAS fee does not require unanimous approval by all EU member states.
Euronews
5 days ago
- Business
- Euronews
Will the EU budget turn cohesion policy into regional 'Hunger Games'?
The EU's proposed budget for 2028 until 2034 runs the risk of turning its cohesion policy into a competition for funding, as it would merge it with other major spending areas. There are now concerns over reduced local control and lack of support for disadvantaged regions. For decades, cohesion funds have helped reduce regional disparities across the EU, supporting everything from road construction and hospital upgrades to unemployment, training programmes and green initiatives. As one of the EU's most tangible policy tools, cohesion funding has delivered visible results in citizens' daily lives — but that may be about to change. This week, the European Commission unveiled its proposed EU long-term budget — the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2028–2034 — which could fundamentally reshape how cohesion policy works, while also potentially marking the end of the system as we know it. Under the new proposal, cohesion policy would be absorbed into a single mega-fund, combining it with other major spending areas such as agriculture, rural development, migration and border control. The stated aim? Simplification. But critics warn this approach could ignite intense competition among regions, sectors and interest groups. 'Putting agriculture, migration, border control, and cohesion policy into one container will turn it into a 'Hunger Games',' said Kata Tüttő, President of the European Committee of the Regions, in an interview with Euronews. She warned that the new structure risks pitting farmers against city mayors, and those in need of agricultural support with those seeking unemployment support, for example. Fears of fragmentation and lost priorities Out of the total proposed €2 trillion budget, €865 billion would be allocated to this consolidated fund, which merges long-standing programs like the EU's Common Agricultural Policy, cohesion funds (accounting for two-thirds of the current EU budget) and the European Social Fund, which supports employment and education. The competition between different lines in the single fund has raised alarm bells among regional leaders, who fear cohesion funding may be deprioritised in the budget negotiations. According to the Commission, €450 billion of the merged fund would still go toward regional development, fisheries and rural areas. Additionally, the proposal includes a minimum allocation of €218 billion specifically earmarked for less developed regions, one of the three traditional pillars of cohesion funding — with the others being developing and developed regions. While this minimum allocation offers a safeguard for the EU's most disadvantaged areas, the remaining categories could face fluctuating support, as they are not ringfenced under the new plan. Centralisation vs. local engagement Beyond the battle for funding, critics have also voiced concerns regarding governance. The proposed delivery model marks a shift away from the EU's tradition of shared management with local and regional authorities. Tüttő sees the move as a clear case of centralisation: 'We will be kicked out from the design, the management and the creation parts of the policy. We will just become implementers, fighting for money,' she said. With many aspects of the proposal still unclear, the coming months will be critical. Local governments across the EU are calling for more involvement in the process — and potentially a rethinking of the proposal before the budget is finalised. 'This is a proposal from the European Commission — it is not the final step, but a starting point,' said Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President for cohesion, while presenting the budget. He added, however, that the EU budget needs more flexibility to respond to evolving challenges.
Euronews
5 days ago
- Business
- Euronews
Lion's share of tripled EU migration budget aimed at border management
Funds dedicated to migration are tripled in the EU Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) proposal, but the lion's share, €48 billion, has been earmarked for policies related to border protection and police operations. Of the total €74 billion earmarked in the MFF 'to make Europe safer and more secure', €26 billion will be dedicated to migration management, including issues related to reception of asylum seekers and other non-border related issues. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's €2 trillion MFF proposal is designed to cover the seven-year period after 2028. In the previous 2021-2027 budget, €25 billions in total were allocated to migration, with €14 billion aimed at border management and €11 billion to asylum reception and integration. The ratio of budget allocated to border management has therefore increased from almost evenly balanced to two to one vis-a-vis migration reception systems. In the next budget cycle EU border agency Frontex alone would bag €12 billion under the proposal, and is expected to undergo a sea change next year, with a sharp increase in staff and new rules of engagement at EU borders. On top of these funds, other budget lines earmarked under the so-called 'Global Europe Instrument' could be used to deter migrants from arriving in Europe. The external action of the EU includes macro financial assistance to third countries, which is often linked to their commitment to prevent migrants' departures from their shores. Funds to third countries that fail to manage irregular migration may be suspended, except humanitarian aid, said an EU official. Critics from civil society The approach has been criticised by human rights groups which monitor the work of the Commission on migration. 'The home affairs funds proposal focuses on border management at the expense of asylum and inclusion,' the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) told Euronews in a statement. "The proposals regarding border and migration policies again focus heavily on militarising borders, escalating the course the EU has been on for over a decade, despite its continued failure in all aspects,' Mark Akkerman, researcher at Stop Wapenhandel and the Transnational Institute told Euronews. 'Billions in proposed spending will end up primarily in the pockets of arms companies, while people on the move will continue to face death, violence, risks and human rights violations,' he added. 'What we know is that the proposal is to increase resources for funds that have sponsored violent border surveillance in the past, like the Border Monitoring and Visa Instrument or the Internal Security Fund. The same goes for Frontex, an agency that's been accused of complicity in human rights violations at the borders multiple times,' Chiara Catelli, Project Officer at PICUM, the umbrella organisation for undocumented migrants, told Euronews. Euronews asked some clarification to the European Commission on the long term spending, without receiving a reply at the time of publication. This reporting is based on MFF budget information available up to this point - no legal texts have been published yet.
Euronews
6 days ago
- Business
- Euronews
EU takes rule of law battle to next level with budget proposal
The European Commission has intensified its rule of law standoff with Hungary by linking future EU funding to adherence to democratic values under its proposed Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), the seven-year budget proposal announced this week. Under the new framework, member states must uphold the EU's core values—including the principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 2 of the EU Treaty—to access funding and secure project approvals. The move introduces a form of 'smart conditionality', Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on Wednesday. 'In the National Regional Partnership Plans, we are making the rule of law and fundamental rights a condition for investment and a focus for reform,' von der Leyen said. 'EU money will be spent responsibly, with strong safeguards, clear conditionality, and appropriate incentives—because this is in the interest of our citizens.' The largest funding stream under the new budget, the Regional Partnership Plans (NRPs), will include allocations for agriculture and cohesion policies. Funding eligibility will be determined in part by the European Commission's annual rule of law reports. If adopted, the measure could lead to the full suspension of EU funds to Hungary. The country is already facing a freeze on €18 billion in EU funds due to concerns over systemic corruption and democratic backsliding. Under the current budgetary framework, Hungary has access to only €10 billion of those funds. German Green MEP Daniel Freund, a vocal critic of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, cautiously welcomed the proposal. 'This is a small step in the right direction,' Freund said. 'Things could improve if this plan goes through—but let's not forget it must be ratified both by the European Parliament and unanimously by the member states, including Hungary. There's still a long battle ahead.' Freund also expressed concerns over parts of the proposal, particularly the shift toward a performance-based funding model similar to the one used during the COVID-19 Recovery Fund. 'There, oversight and accountability were much weaker,' he warned. Hungary remains the only EU country currently subject to the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism, a tool that allows the suspension of funds in cases of systemic breaches of EU values. Budapest strongly opposed the mechanism's adoption in 2020. Hungarian pro-government MEP Csaba Dömötör criticised the Commission's approach, calling it politically motivated. 'Withholding money only serves leftist, liberal governments,' Dömötör told Euronews. 'If they can cause economic damage, it benefits leftist forces during elections. This is all political blackmail.' Prime Minister Orbán also slammed the proposed budget, calling it a 'pro-Ukraine budget' and accusing the Commission of prioritising Ukraine over European citizens. He urged the Commission to withdraw the plan, arguing that it is too weak to be seriously negotiated.
