Philanthropy is at a crossroads. With global crises escalating; from Eastern DR Congo to Gaza, Sudan, and beyond; and overseas aid slashed across donor countries. Charities and NGOs face crushing uncertainty, globally. Yet demand for their services has never been higher.
Recently, at Cohere’s Congo Gathering Point, we heard harrowing updates: nearly 80,000 people are now sheltering in the bushes and makeshift huts in Uvira and Tanganyika territories, Eastern DR Congo; recent victims of the M23 and other armed groups, as well as government forces. These families have lost everything. There is no food. No clean water. No emergency care. Disease, starvation, and sexual violence are widespread threats. And yet; there is barely any humanitarian response. Eastern DR Congo’s region has generally been plagued with instability for decades now that has displaced millions of people, internally and to neighboring countries like Uganda.
Cross to countries like Uganda, one of the largest refugee hosting countries in Africa, local Refugee led and community based initiatives such as Tomorrow Vijana , operating in refugee settlements across the country are often ignored by funding agencies or if they get any grant, it often comes in form of short-term, outcomes based and restricted project funding.
With the protracted and complex nature of today’s aspects like forced displacement, I think philanthropy if still relevant must be radically rethought to be able to sustainably respond to these challenges. However, as we have seen, the majority of funding available to local NGOs operating in places like DR Congo, South Sudan or Uganda, still comes in the form of restricted project grants. These grants, often limited in scope and duration, tie local organisations to donor-defined outcomes and metrics. They’re rarely allowed to cover what Synchronicity Earth calls “keep the lights-on” essentials like staff salaries, administrative support, or long-term capacity-building; costs that actually keep organisations alive and effective as they respond to protracted crises.
This model is not just outdated. It’s disempowering!
Frontline, proximate leaders; those closest to the crises; are forced into never ending exhausting cycles of proposal writing and reporting instead of focusing on the real work of community organising and programmes implementation. Emotional burnout is rampant among staff. Organisational stability is fragile at best.
When project grants end, many local organisations; already without reserves; ultimately collapse. The result? Communities are left behind, abandoned by the very groups that once stood beside them. Philanthropy doing more harm than healing communities it purportedly came to rescue?
It’s critical therefore that philanthropy shifts from short-term project thinking to long-term organisational funding – the kind that builds strength from the inside out. Initiatives by the RINGO Project, the Trust-Based Philanthropy Project, and Cohere are advocating for this shift, proving that unrestricted funding enables trust, adaptability, and real, locally driven impact.
Yes, some funders still fear that unrestricted funding means giving up control. But from my experience and years of implementing trust based grants with for instance Refugee-led organisations (RLOs) in Uganda in partnership with organisations like Cohere, it has became clear to me that ‘Control does not equal impact. Trust does’.
We therefore must replace compliance-driven giving with human relationship-based philanthropy. We must show up. Walk alongside proximate leaders. Let them lead. Support their vision, not your own. This is how we unlock meaningful, lasting change – not through performative metrics, but through partnerships grounded in dignity, empathy, and shared purpose.
Leave a Reply