Takeju Ogata takes his position from June 20. He joined the foundation in 1993 and previously served as Nippon’s president. 

Ogata replaces current chairman Yohei Sasakawa, who had led the foundation since 2005. 

Writing on his blog, Sasakawa emphasised his strong desire for the Nippon Foundation to move forward under new leadership. 

‘I will devote the rest of my life to working as hard as I can as a ‘foot soldier ’to help achieve the mission of The Nippon Foundation under the leadership of the new Chairman,’ said the outgoing chairman. 

The Nippon Foundation is the largest private foundation in Japan and ranks second among the 20 largest philanthropic funders in Asia. 

Despite that accolade, Haruto Okabe, Japan Representative at the U.S.-Japan Foundation, argues that Japanese philanthropy has fallen behind. 

Shafi Musaddique is the news editor at Alliance magazine. 

With thanks to Fan Li, Alliance East Asia representative, for her contribution to this story.  

The post Japan’s Nippon Foundation chair steps down, replaced by 80-year-old former president  appeared first on Alliance magazine.

Speaking to Alliance magazine from her home in Oakland, California, Irma Shauf-Bajar, executive director of 18 Million Rising – a nonprofit working with marginalised Asian Americans – described the shock of having a quarter of her budget defunded by the Wellspring Philanthropic Fund, a progressive grantmaker distributing millions towards racial justice movements. The fund is set to cease operating by 2028. 

‘This is not a time to be silent, because then it becomes the norm,’ she said.  

What happened? 

On the last week of January 2025, Shauf-Bajar says a senior executive member of Wellspring asked for a call with ‘no other option’ but the day he wanted.

‘I’m in the Zoom meeting with folks that I’ve never met before, including two women who say nothing at all. One person did all the talking,’ she recalls.

That person, a male speaker, is possibly ‘related to the billionaire CEO of Wellspring,’ the executive director believes. 

Wellspring had pulled out a social media post by 18 Million Rising published 12 October 2023, which called on Asian Americans to ‘speak out to end Israel’s oppression of Palestinians.’ 

‘Israel is also a global weapons exporter. Some of its biggest customers include India and the Philippines where Israeli arms are used to repress Asian movements for justice,’ the social media post said.  

‘Each of us has a stake in speaking out against the illegal Israeli occupation that fuels this decades-long cycle of violence in Gaza and beyond; a cycle that harms both Palestinians and Israelis,’ it went on to say. 

Shauf-Bajar told Alliance that the social media post was a ‘solidarity statement’ which, she believed, broke no contractual obligation – particularly given Wellspring’s record for funding social and racial justice movements. 

The nonprofit director said that she viewed Israel’s military assault on Gaza as ‘doing harm to both Palestinians and Israelis. We knew that we had to say something.’ 

18 Million Rising also asked people to join Jewish Voice For Peace, a progressive advocacy group that has called on the US to break its political and economic support for Israel.  

With a quarter of a million gone, she feared the immediate impact of that financial black hole. 

‘This happened right after [US President Donald] Trump was inaugurated and he was already talking about mass deportations of immigrants,’ she said.  

‘I wasn’t just fighting for my life, but I was fighting for my team.’ 

Wellspring, with a track record of operating opaquely, did not reply to Alliance’s request for its version of events. 

Defunding ‘wider part of democracy being trampled on’ 

Shauf-Bajar believes defunding over Palestinian advocacy is part of a wider attack on democracy under the Trump administration’s ‘MAGA movement’, which has so far targeted nonprofits, progressive philanthropy and academia. 

‘This is not just about a grant. This is about censorship. This is about us not being able to like voice our solidarity with the Palestinian people,’ she said. 

Data on the extent and scope of defunding organisations who show Palestinian solidarity has been difficult to establish. 

Some estimates suggest over $8 million defunded from pro-Palestinian grantees between October 2023 and July 2024.  

An Alliance survey conducted in December 2024 found that 59 per cent of respondents – a majority of which are staff members of institutional philanthropy, such as foundations – said they had stood silent on Israel-Palestine, with the risk of negative media coverage holding them back from speaking out. 

18 Million Rising said it has been able to plug the funding gap left by Wellspring, including an anonymous gift received after Shauf-Bajar went public.   

Though it was a traumatic experience, Shauf-Bajar says defunding strengthened 18 Million Rising’s resolve to be more than just a grant recipient.

Now she wants to collaborate with progressive nonprofits and funders ‘close to the ground’. A new pooled fund for political mobilisation is in the pipeline. 

‘We’re the ones coming up with these ideas, even though funders should be leading,’ said the California-based director, who called on philanthropy to step up ‘not just for services, but ideas and organising’. 

‘We call on philanthropy – major donors or individuals – to side with us and the movement that is trying to counter censorship and connect the dots on how silencing is a wider part of our democracy currently being trampled on,’ she said.

‘Release your funds now and collaborate with the progressive moment’.  

Shafi Musaddique is the news editor at Alliance magazine.

The post ‘Funders silently defunding’: How US nonprofit lost a quarter of a million after pro-Palestine post – and rebuilt itself  appeared first on Alliance magazine.

The King Badouin Foundation transferred the system over to Philea. Both are based in Brussels, the de facto political capital of the European Union. 

The system ensures a secure process by which donors can give, as well as the exchange of information and best practice.  

‘The challenges we face require philanthropy to be at its very best, including being able to make the optimal use of its finite resources,’ said Delphine Moralis, Philea CEO.  

‘This is an exciting – but critically important – opportunity to take on the responsibility for writing TGE’s next chapter, as it is currently the only practical and secure solution for tax-effective philanthropy across the continent.’ 

The transfer builds on Philea’s ‘European Philanthropy Manifesto’ which has called on the continent’s policymakers to bring the Single Market to philanthropy. 

The European Union currently operates as a single market through with freedom of movement for goods, services and people. 

Shafi Musaddique is the news editor at Alliance magazine.

The post Philea takes over European cross border philanthropy network  appeared first on Alliance magazine.

Investing in adaptation and resilience enables nations and communities to prepare, recover, and build infrastructure robust enough to face the future, and is paramount for their progress and well-being. Investment in adaptation yields significant fiscal and economic savings by averting future losses. For vulnerable countries, climate adaptation is no longer an option—it is a necessity. Though funds are required, adapting is cheaper than not adapting.

And yet, a chasm exists between developing countries’ needs and actual investment levels. Annual financing for adaptation and resilience languishes at about 10 percent of estimated needs, which are projected to be $215 billion to $387 billion annually by 2030. In Africa, for instance, enhanced spending on resilience is vital for food security, livelihoods, supply chain protection, and staving off health crises. Furthermore, global financing for loss and damage—the unavoidable social and economic consequences of climate change—remains a footnote.

A unique opportunity for philanthropies

Philanthropies are learning more about climate adaptation and resilience. There are many opportunities for philanthropies to get involved in supporting climate adaptation that many may not have thought about, mostly because these opportunities invite giving at higher levels than in the past. They promote pooling of resources to enable greater leverage and impact of philanthropic resources.

But first, some background. The 2024 report from the Independent High Level Expert Group on Climate Finance (IHLEG) underscored the urgent need to bridge the vast financing gaps hindering both climate mitigation and resilience-building. It stressed mobilizing funds that do not exacerbate national debt, even as Official Development Assistance from the United States and much of Europe in early 2025 is being downsized. In such a climate, developing countries need alternative sources of concessional and grant financing.

In 2023, philanthropic giving for climate change was estimated between $9.9 billion and $16.4 billion annually. Alarmingly, only about $600 million (a mere 4-6 percent of this total) was dedicated to adaptation, according to the ClimateWorks Foundation. Historically, philanthropies have prioritized mitigation, mainly sustainable energy. A new survey indicates foundations are now paying more attention to adaptation, a shift that is long overdue.

At the United Nations climate summit (COP28) in 2023, a coalition of 21 leading philanthropic organizations, including the Rockefeller Foundation, Aga Khan Development Network, Temasek Trust, and the Shockwave Foundation, called for greater action on climate adaptation. The Adaptation and Resilience Funders Collaborative now unites 60 foundations to learn, coordinate, and invest. Separately, the World Economic Forum’s Giving to Amplify Earth Action (GAEA) initiative is fostering public-private partnerships to multiply financial contributions for adaptation and nature.

For foundations looking to give in new and different ways and leverage the strengths of other development partners to increase the impact of their contributions, adaptation and resilience provide promising avenues. These involve collaboration with multilateral development banks (MDBs), offering mutually beneficial outcomes.

Key opportunities for higher-impact giving

Philanthropic organizations can pursue many avenues for contributions to climate adaptation, from local community projects to broader sectoral or global initiatives. Many foundations possess deep-rooted partnerships in developing regions, providing vital channels for direct giving. Specific needs could include better information for project planning and supporting governments to understand and prioritize cost-effective climate interventions.

There are also opportunities for expanding the quantity and improving the quality of MDB adaptation financing by crowding in substantial funds from large foundations. Such action could be extremely impactful at a time when developing countries are facing increasing financial and climate-related stress simultaneously.

However, to truly scale their impact, foundations need innovative investment strategies. Here we dive into five avenues for philanthropy to work proactively and innovatively with partners to scale up concessional climate financing.

1.Co-finance projects with multilateral development banks

Philanthropic organizations and MDBs can jointly finance climate adaptation, nature restoration, and resilience-building projects—particularly in low-income, climate-vulnerable countries. Philanthropists have historically contributed to MDB-managed trust funds for research and capacity-building, but these funds do not typically co-finance large MDB projects. Pooled philanthropic capital could provide longer-term financing, which many adaptation investments demand. This approach, previously promoted by the Center for Global Development, allows philanthropies to expand their impact.

2. Provide grant financing for the loss and damage fund

Philanthropies could support the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), operationalized at COP28 to help particularly vulnerable countries cope with the adverse effects of climate change. The Fund itself plans to explore non-donor and private financing.

Philanthropy is well-placed to provide some urgently needed early grant financing to augment the very limited funds pledged by countries so far; doing so would allow developing country governments to meet growing government liabilities related to climate loss and damage without incurring greater debt.

It is not realistic for philanthropies to cover a major portion of the total projected needs. In fact, the negotiating bodies (and governments generally) are still determining what those total needs might be. Nevertheless, early philanthropic partnership could inform crucial funding discussions.

Crucially, philanthropies played a notable role in raising early awareness at COP26 in 2021 of the need to devote more financing to loss and damage. They can continue to apply public pressure, catalyze support, and foster innovative non-donor contributions.

3. Create global funding mechanisms to leverage MDB core capital

The G20 Triple Agenda Report proposes an innovative idea: create global funding mechanisms through which non-government investors, including philanthropy, could help expand MDBs’ financing capacity. Such a mechanism could use grant contributions to allow MDBs to leverage their core capital, potentially multiplying philanthropic giving 4-5x. This multiplier effect arises from MDBs sharing portfolio risks, enabling them to lend more with their existing capital. Accordingly, contributions of several billion dollars from philanthropies could stimulate an additional $10 billion to $20 billion in MDB lending.

The International Financing Facility for Education (IFFED) serves as a promising model. Through the IFFED, country guarantees enhance philanthropic cash contributions to create a financial base that can be leveraged up to four times. A similarly designed climate financing facility could see a $2 billion grant from philanthropists increase total MDB concessional lending by as much as $10 billion, and by even more if catalyzing private financing. Since philanthropies would want a voice in the management of such funds, a suitable governance structure will need to be developed.

4. Contribute to disaster risk insurance premiums

Countries increasingly seek disaster risk insurance against the economic shocks of major disasters. While insurance alone cannot eliminate climate risk, even nations with robust adaptation programs face unforeseeable impacts. Sovereign disaster risk finance enhances governments’ capacity and agility to meet post-disaster funding needs without compromising fiscal stability.

Philanthropies could help developing countries pay insurance premiums. The potential benefits for vulnerable countries could be, on average, about 100 times the cost, though premiums vary. This is not a new idea: bilateral donors have previously covered such costs, for example, the European Union subsidizing premiums for the Caribbean Catastrophic Risk Insurance Facility. Philanthropic involvement in risk pooling not only offers substantial financial benefits, but also creates leverage to convince countries to undertake important climate adaptation measures before disaster hits.

5. Develop better climate adaptation metrics

As philanthropies scale up their partnerships with MDBs, the need for better metrics of climate risk reduction, resilience-building and loss and damage financing will grow. WRI, for example, is working with the Gates Foundation and ClimateWorks to develop improved economic analysis and metrics, testing a wide range of approaches — from tracking inputs to outcomes at project and national levels.

Foundations, as informed partners to donors, governments and communities, should continue supporting the research and technical assistance required for parties to converge on commonly accepted metrics. As vested partners, foundations can and should play an important role in debates over how adaptation and loss and damage financing gets measured, monitored, and evaluated in the years to come. 

A new era of philanthropic engagement

Poverty is a chief driver of vulnerability and vice versa. In the absence of improved adaptation, climate change will exacerbate both. Building climate resilience is a global collective responsibility. Philanthropies can scale up their vital work by building new financing partnerships with multilateral development institutions, favoring mechanisms that provide greater leverage and long-term scope over more traditional approaches. 

The first four ideas outlined above represent significant shifts in philanthropy’s potential role and scale. However, they also present opportunities to significantly scale up the impact foundations can have in an area of growing importance amid escalating climate impacts. By joining together and speaking with a common voice, foundations can amplify their influence and facilitate more efficient progress. The unprecedented challenge of climate change adaptation requires a higher level of engagement to support vulnerable countries and communities, and at this moment, philanthropies can play a decisive role.

Marilou Uy is Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Global Development Policy Center at Boston University. Carter Brandon is Senior Fellow at the World Resources Institute (WRI).

The post How philanthropy can supercharge climate adaptation finance appeared first on Alliance magazine.

That’s the stark warning from a first major report looking at the impact of USAID cuts on global journalism and media outlets, published by the nonprofit Internews Europe.

In 2024, $271.5 million in foreign aid assistance via USAID was categorised for ‘Independent Media and Free Flow of Information’. Of this, says the report, an estimated $150 million directly funded journalism and media. 

Newsrooms have shut down or reduced to their bare bones since US President Donald Trump’s decision to freeze international aid. Journalists working in conflict zones, authoritarian regimes, disaster-affected regions and underserved communities have felt the brunt.

‘In these contexts, other business models, such as advertising or subscriptions, are often non-existent or unreliable. And it’s not just media organisations that have been devastated by these cuts – associated support organisations, such as unions, training institutions, legal services, and advocacy bodies, have also been severely impacted,’ said the report.

Latin America appears to be the region most impacted by funding, as by proportion. 

US state funding represented over 75 per cent of donor funding to Latin American media between 2020 and 2024. 

At least 60 media outlets have been directly affected by cuts to around 450 projects in 22 countries in the region. 

Around 90 per cent of digital independent media outlets in Bolivia currently rely on donor funding. The majority have now been cut. 

‘This leaves as our only options private foundations, some European countries or the European Union itself as possible promoters of projects aligned with our interests,’ said one media outlet from Venezuela.  

USAID funding supported radio stations in Africa. The only independent national FM radio in South Sudan, Eye Radio, has been forced to reduce staff from 47 to 12 with funds drying up, and will struggle to remain open into 2026 to cover the general election.  

One anonymous media outlet in Sudan said ‘will bring the entire information system to a standstill, as there is no reliable alternative information system in the Sudanese space.’ 

In Asia, half the total funding received from USAID has gone.  

In 2024, more than 300 media and support organisations were assisted with USG funds in Indonesia alone.  

In Afghanistan, 13 radio stations reported that an average of 72 per cent of their budgets came through USAID. Since the aid freeze in February, 65 per cent of their staff have been impacted through job losses or salary reductions, and nine stations warned they were at risk of closure. 

The report warned that rapid response funds, flexibility in existing funds and core funding support were needed.

Reporters Sans Frontières (Reporters Without Borders), Deutsche Welle, BBC Media Action and International Media Support were among a consortium of media bodies that collaborated on the study.

Shafi Musaddique is the news editor at Alliance magazine.

The post USAID journalism funds to disappear ‘potentially for good’, study warns appeared first on Alliance magazine.

The 2023 Women’s World Cup felt like a true turning point for women’s sport. I’ll never forget watching the Australia vs. France penalty shootout in a packed pub in London. Filled to the brim with fellow homesick Australians, the whole pub was on edge – cheering, completely caught up in the moment. It was the ‘Matilda Effect’ in full force – the wave of pride, support, and visibility sparked by the Australian women’s football team’s incredible performance.

With nearly 2 million fans attending matches and over 21 million tuning in, it became the most watched program in Australian TV history. In that moment, it really felt like women’s sport was getting the attention and respect it always deserved.

Women’s sport is experiencing an undeniable surge in participation, viewership and cultural relevance. Once considered an afterthought in the global sports industry, it’s now proving to be one of the most dynamic and fast-growing sectors. The momentum shows no signs of slowing down, with upcoming major tournaments like the Union of Europeans Football Associations (UEFA) Women’s Euro and 2025 Women’s Rugby World Cup.

If transformative investment and narrative building can elevate a fifth-tier men’s club, why is similar attention not being directed towards top-tier women’s football? 

Backing women’s sport matters not just for the game, but for what is symbolises. It was women’s football that began as a form of resistance to societal norms, attracting more open-minded communities and fostering a culture of acceptance and diversity. In this same way, women’s sport provides philanthropy with an opportunity – a chance to foster real equality and respect for women and girls around the world.

Investment in sport: The gender gap

In just five years media coverage of women’s sport is up by 275%, revenue has skyrocketed 300% since 2022 and in 2025 alone it’s expected to bring in over $2.35 billion. Despite this, investment in women’s sport still falls significantly behind men’s across broadcasting, pay, facilities, marketing and sponsorship, with women’s teams often only receiving funding through associations with men’s leagues or bundled sponsorship deals.

For example, the 2025 French Open schedule revealed that not a single women’s match was featured during the prime-time evening slots. Excluding women’s sport from prime-time slots means less visibility, less sponsorship and investment opportunities, contributing to a persistent doubt around women’s potential in an industry that favours men.

A recent Alliance article, explored  how men’s football has long been tied to philanthropy. In it, Shafi Musadique, tracks how celebrity investment – like the 2020 takeover of fifth-tier Wrexham AFC by Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney – can transform a small club into a global phenomenon through funding, storytelling, and visibility. But what happens when we apply a gendered lens to these examples?

If transformative investment and narrative building can elevate a fifth-tier men’s club, why is similar attention not being directed towards top-tier women’s football? Why is it that investors are still hesitant to back women’s sport – even as it achieves record-breaking audiences, growing talent depth, and undeniable global momentum?

Real life impact: Where is philanthropy in women’s sport?

Some of the most impactful shifts in women’s sport have been driven not by policy or performance but by strategic philanthropy. Alex Ohanian’s $20 million investment in Chelsea Women’s FC marks a bold endorsement of the game’s future in the UK. Meanwhile, it was at the 2024 Paris Olympics that had the first on-site nursery established by Allyson Felix with a strong 20 million pledge from Melinda French Gates. Since 1974, The Billie Jean King Foundation has been challenging structural inequalities. And more recently, Michele Kang has emerged as a transformative force in women’s football. These investments go beyond financial support, they reshape culture and create lasting change.

Philanthropist, Michele Kang, an advocate for the growth of women’s football, aptly stated: ‘This is an incredible opportunity, and the time is now. If you miss it, you’re going to regret it.’ The gap in investment isn’t because women’s sport isn’t ready – the potential for growth is still being underestimated.

While philanthropic investments spark meaningful change, they also highlight an underlying fragility. In 2022 Australia’s richest person, Gina Rinehart, withdrew a $15 million investment from Netball Australia after players refused to wear the logo of Rinehart’s mining company during a match. Their decision was made in solidarity with teammate Donnell Wallam, an Indigenous netballer who raised concerns about the company’s ties to colonial exploitation and disrespect of First Nation’s communities.

Withdrawing her investment, Rinehart expressed that it’s ‘unnecessary for sports organisations to be used as the vehicle for social or political causes’. Comments like these risk reducing athletes to thoughtless performers and belittling their voices, perspectives and the communities they represent. Unfortunately for Rinehart, sport has, and always will be, political.

Importantly, philanthropic investments often focus on high-profile wins because they offer visibility and measurable success. But these can overshadow the vital, long-term support needed at the grassroots and youth development level. As we continue to zoom out and view investment in women’s sport as part of the broader push for gender equity, we must not overlook that real change starts with investing in young girls.

Women in sport are already proving to be so much for than just athletes. The U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team’s battle in a landmark lawsuit secured a $24 million settlement and equal pay across all competitions.

Investing in young girls for gender equity

Investing in women and girls’ sport creates opportunities for gender equality at an individual, community and societal level.

Role models and individual empowerment

Investing in women’s sport isn’t just about creating more opportunities for athletes, it’s about building a more equitable society. Recent research in Australia shows that the average age that girls drop out of sport is 15, due to a lack of visibility and role models. If you can’t see it, you can’t be it.

Inspiring player stories like basketball star Caitlin Clark, Olympian rugby player Ilan Maher, and teams like the Matildas and Lionesses are fuelling a global phenomenon empowering young girls everywhere. They’re just a few among countless women breaking barriers across all sports. Investment helps amplify these stories, increasing the visibility of role models for the next generation of girls.

Girls belong in sport at every age, level, and ability and they deserve the resources and sustainable pathways to help them reach their potential and continue thriving in sport.

Community and inclusion

Women’s football has long been a safe space for historically marginalised communities. At the 2023 Women’s World Cup, 88 players proudly identified as part of the LGBTQIA+ community – a stark contrast to the men’s premier league, where there are currently no openly gay players.

Men’s football remains entangled with threads of toxic masculinity – an ingrained culture often linked to violence, aggression, and exclusion. Continual headlines of violence and inappropriate behaviour raises the question: has toxic masculinity in men’s football finally met its mirror in the inclusive, respectful alternative offered by the women’s game?

To help foster community and inclusion through sport, funders must also look beyond gender when investing in women’s sport. Marginalised communities often face multiple barriers and race, class and disability all play a role in determining a young person’s access to sport. 

Girls United Football Association, a grassroots organisation based in London and Mexico, is a strong example of forging community amongst young girls from diverse backgrounds. Their vision? To create a world with a level playing field on and off the pitch. Girls in the program shared what football means to them beyond sport:

‘A home away from home, a place to feel safe’

‘Football to me is consistency. It’s knowing that every week come rain or shine, I have a place to be. A place full of warm, welcoming faces and smelly bibs…’

Initiatives like ‘Girls United FA’ help break down barriers and foster inclusion, showing sport is more than just a game; it’s a foundation where community is built and belonging is nurtured.

Societal impact and leadership

This visibility goes beyond boosting participation but plays a crucial role in shaping our future leaders. When we dive deeper into what ‘sport’ means and creates – 94% of women in C-suite roles (CEO, CFO, COO’s) have a background in sport, yet only 25% of young girls connect sport to future career success.

Women in sport are already proving to be so much for than just athletes. The U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team’s battle in a landmark lawsuit secured a $24 million settlement and equal pay across all competitions. Their fight ignited global debates on fairness, equity and respect that have since extended beyond sport, to society at large.

When we invest in women’s sport, we’re not just closing gaps in pay or opportunity – we’re empowering a generation to lead, challenge systems, and help make gender equity the norm, not the exception.

Seize the momentum

Women’s sport has the power to challenge harmful gender norms, empower young girls and women, create leadership pathways and foster safe, inclusive spaces. Realising this impact requires significant and sustained investment. Philanthropy has the power and resources to champion the movement, encouraging investors, policy makers, brands and everyday supporters to invest in a future for women’s sport that delivers enormous social and economic returns.

Now, more than ever, funders must get off the sidelines and onto the pitch.

Nadine Gabriels is a phsyiotherapist, writer and advocate for gender equality and accessibility in sport.

The post Backing her game: Philanthropy as a force for women’s sport appeared first on Alliance magazine.

Digital and online spaces are public squares, mirroring and impacting our analogue worlds. Technology platforms can shape discourse, social interactions, economic opportunities…

This article is only available for our subscribers.

View on Alliance magazine

The post If feminist philanthropy wants to build a better world, it needs to move online. appeared first on Alliance magazine.

But we have heard this sentence come up frequently in the past three years, as we try to redefine monsters for a modern context. In the majority of European Languages, including English, the word ‘monster’ is defined as: any imaginary creature that is large, ugly, and frightening. Do the monsters of today have the face of a war criminal or of a wealthy person that patently abuses their own power for personal purposes? Perhaps their true nature can be found in the original etymology—the word monster derives from Latin and it refers to an ‘something extraordinary’, at times ‘prodigious’.

I write this piece from Cuba, the place where I live and work, and where I returned after the Humanitarian Leadership Conference, held in Doha on 8-9 April. It was my first conference ever, and I went there looking for a safe space where I could participate in the co-creation of something new. I feel full, confused, overwhelmed by the generosity of my colleagues. And I keep thinking that Gramsci was right. The old world-order is over. The new one has not been shaped yet. And in this space of immense crisis (some say polycrisis) and opportunity, in this confusion, in this delayed response that all traditional actors are showing, prodigious and extraordinary beings are finally finding the space to emerge in the humanitarian sector.

Below a few that especially impressed me:

Mission Kharkiv (MK). This organisation was initiated by a Spanish national with Ukrainian roots, Ross Skowronski, in response to the disorganisation of the medical supply chain that followed the beginning of the war, and immediately received big support from numerous Ukrainian citizens. Mission Kharkiv’s action is moved by data, which means that its projects are developed after a deep assessment of the real needs of the people, done by staff members who are part of the same communities that will receive treatment. Moreover, MK shows a deep sense of accountability, not only to donors but to the people that they serve. Having little previous awareness of humanitarian principles, standards and protocols (MK founders were not humanitarian staff before the war) allowed MK to adopt a critical and constructive perspective on the humanitarian structure, and to challenge many of the assumptions and burdens of the sector. MK allocates more than 97 percent of its budget to projects, it provides transparent and data-driven information to donors and project participants. MK counts on the important commitment of individual donors who, in the words of the founder ‘played a crucial role in getting MK off the ground’. However, its annual report shows something concerning: a big chunk of the funding gathered by MK had to be channelled through INGOs (International Non Governmental Organisations), which means that in general, international donors did not trust MK capacities to implement a deliver. It also means that a relevant part of the funding originally allocated to projects was spent for the intermediary role of an INGO. It seems a matter of trust rather than of capacities and it poses an important question to a philanthropic sector that wants to decolonise itself.

NEAR is a movement ‘of Global South civil society organisations reinventing aid through innovative ideas, knowledge sharing, and influencing’. These are not empty words. NEAR acts in the humanitarian space through bold ideas and practices, its members show their agency and embody local leadership in many of its nuances. With nearly 300 members in 42 countries, NEAR proposes itself as a meaningful and challenging interlocutor for traditional humanitarian players: in response to the recent document on humanitarian reset, signed by Tom Fletcher (Humanitarian Relief Coordinator), NEAR published a joint statement which is almost a roadmap, a document that clearly underlines some of the urgent and important changes needed in the sector, and it moreover gives a timeline and suggests four concrete streams of action: democratising data, decentralising coordination, promoting community-led accountability, and transforming pooled funds. A few words on the latter: NEAR promotes a vision of pooled funds as powerful tools for the promotion of a shift of power and resources to local organisations. According to this idea, country-based pool funds should be mainly directed to local actors (while today this is rather an exception) and international pool funds should reduce barriers to foster wider access, and open windows for real-time community-driven actions. Moreover, NEAR invites to explore the potential of pool funds in contexts where the civic space is shrinking. One more extraordinary action undertaken by NEAR is the creation of a bridge fund for those global south organisations that were especially impacted by the cuts of USAID funds in January 2025.

The reverse call for proposal was developed by RINGO. It is part of a wider stream of work aiming at transforming and decolonising the INGO sector, which includes the Pledge for change, a series of commitments signed by 12 INGOs that promise they will actively work on promoting equitable partnership, authentic storytelling and on influencing wider change in the sector, based on the principles of solidarity, humility, self-determination, and equality.

This ambitious prototype seeks to reverse usual funding mechanisms by shifting power towards local communities and promoting a more equal encounter among partners in projects. It also includes a reflection on how accountability should not only be directed to donors only, but also to the communities engaged in projects.

The process is being piloted by a number of civil society organisations (CSO) including AGNA and the Zambia Governance Foundation. It starts with the identification of local priorities and assets, done by the communities themselves and accompanied by a local CSO, and the publication of a call. Recognising that appropriate risk management and accountability procedures are needed, the reverse call for proposal includes the use of another RINGO prototype on risk sharing and compliance management, ‘to negotiate proportionate and reasonable due diligence procedures required by all parties involved in the partnership.’

The first call in Zambia received two applications and only one of those is a signatory of the Pledge for Change (Plan International). While it’s possible that in the future this initiative will gain momentum, it’s also important to recognise that this challenging start is an index of how traditional actors in the humanitarian and development sector struggle to adapt to new needs and requests, and risk missing the opportunity to be real agents of the change they say they want to promote.

I returned from Doha with the feeling of having witnessed something extraordinary, unfolding while many of the traditional actors of our sectors are still struggling with adequate vocabulary and other (often aesthetic) questions. And therefore my question to myself and to my fellow travellers from the global minority is: are we ready to let the old world behind and to witness to the creation of something new and unknown?

Carla Vitantonio is a humanitarian and development practitioner and an independent researcher based in Cuba. She hosts the podcast Living Decoloniality. She sits in the board of the International Humanitarian Studies Association (IHSA).

Author’s note: With thanks to all those fellow travellers who helped me with data and explanations while I was writing this article.

The post Emerging in the time of crisis: Global projects to watch appeared first on Alliance magazine.

Alliance magazine will convene the first global gathering of the specialist philanthropy media in September 2025. The convening in upstate New York will bring together leaders of the global philanthropy media – titles with a primary focus on covering philanthropy around the world. Attendees are expected from 13 titles spanning Asia, Africa, Europe and North America.

As the field of philanthropy grows in complexity and visibility, so too does the need for an independent, pluralistic and accountable philanthropy media to provide expert coverage of the field.

Alliance magazine’s executive editor, Charles Keidan said: ‘We’re looking forward to welcoming and working with peers from philanthropy titles around the world. This first of its kind gathering will unlock new opportunities to improve practice and support the search for viable models to serve the growing numbers of readers seeking insight and inspiration from the world of philanthropy.’

By convening the field’s editors, directors and founders, the summit aims to support specialist philanthropy media titles to develop their role as essential infrastructure for the global philanthropy sector.

Chronicle of Philanthropy CEO, Stacy Palmer, said: ‘At a time when the role of philanthropy is more important than ever to solve problems – and we are in the midst of a great wealth transfer – the public needs more information and context about whether private donors are making a difference. Journalists play an essential role in ensuring effective giving and providing the kind of scrutiny that leads to better results for society, but too few media organizations are covering this vast and sprawling sector of society with the sophistication that’s needed. I look forward to hearing from journalists around the world about how we can all play a stronger role by collaborating, innovating, and learning from one another.’

The summit is being organised by Alliance magazine, with input from peers across the field. It will take place at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund’s Pocantico Center. Colleagues from Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors will provide expert facilitation. Participants will also visit the nearby Rockefeller Archive Center to look at how philanthropy has been documented and reported on over time.

The two-day programme will explore questions around editorial integrity, revenue models, underreported stories, and the role of philanthropy media in a changing and globalising philanthropic landscape. The gathering also aims to support a more globally representative field, with perspectives from across regions and languages.

Lilian Kaivilu, lead editor and co-founder of the Africa Solutions Media Hub, which focuses on the impact of philanthropy in East Africa, commented: ‘I believe that philanthropy media is crucial to amplify the social impact of philanthropic organisations, institutions and individuals who are offering scalable solutions to the challenges facing the African region. It is a great pleasure to be part of this gathering of editors in philanthropy media; particularly to hear unique ways in which editors are making a case for philanthropic initiatives while staying objective and empathetic to their audiences.’

The philanthropy media summit will take place on 29 and 30 September 2025. The event is supported by the Adessium Foundation, Gates Foundation, and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, though the deliberations of editors, journalists and directors are entirely their own.

Jakob Thomsen, editor in Chief of Denmark’s Fundats, said: ‘I hope that a stronger network between philanthropy titles can become a starting point to inspire national philanthropies to work closer together to address common global challenges.

‘With an increasingly politicised philanthropic sector in Denmark, I am looking forward to learning how other national philanthropy titles manage to balance critical journalism with sustainable subscription-based business models,’ Thomsen added.

For further information or questions about the summit, please contact the event manager Zoe Greenfield zoe@alliancemagazine.org.

The post Alliance to convene first global gathering of philanthropy focused titles appeared first on Alliance magazine.

The Lab on Community Foundations, Research, and the SDGs took place in Făgăraș and Cincșor, Romania, was a side event to the Infrastructures for the Future Conference in April 2025, bringing together community foundation support organisations (CFSOs), community foundations (CFs), and foundations professionals, alongside researchers, to discuss the interconnections between CF and CFSO practices, the SDGs, and research.

The Lab focused on the role of community foundations as knowledge infrastructure for local community sustainability, by exploring how CFs and foundations engage with the SDGs in Australia, Brazil, Chile, Kenya, New Zealand, Romania, and the US. This article highlights some of the main ideas discussed and shares the perspectives of several participants.

Geopolitical instability distracting from SDG work

The SDGs have been at the core of the global multilateral system until recently. Current multilateral dynamics indicate an increased polarisation between autocracies and democracies, with a decreasing drive to advance on the SDGs and articulate further common goals. Without global alignment on development goals, more pressure will likely be put on local communities, which will have to address the consequences of global crises—most likely on their own.

The SDGs find themselves at the intersection of sustainability and research. They are composed of a set of indicators and rely on quantitative data. The UN reporting process (the Voluntary National Reviews, or VNRs) indicates the importance of research for understanding progress toward sustainability, as defined by Agenda 2030. FRI has explored the interconnections between community foundations’ work and the SDGs in a report, observing the difficulty of localising the targets and indicators as defined by Agenda 2030. Despite these challenges, community foundation movements in several countries find the SDGs relevant, at times contributing to the development of Local Voluntary Reviews. Focusing on meaningfully localising the SDGs raises questions about the role of CFs in research, data collection, and analysis. An example is presented from New Zealand.

Eleanor Cater, New Zealand

For community foundations, the SDGS give us our ‘why’—without them, it can be like the wild west out there! CFs have a mission that is naturally aligned with the SDGs and can drive greater sustainability and impact, however CFs have become adept at building financial mechanisms and not necessarily sustainability mechanisms.

In the context of local CFs (as shared by James Magowan) the SDG’s need to be viewed through the lens of ‘how the SDG framework is good for you’; to be applied, the SDGs must become a part of the DNA of the organisation, a whole team commitment, and they require a deep commitment to research and knowledge building.

For the SDGs framework to thrive Community Foundations of Aotearoa NZ needs to build knowledge infrastructure within our network, which will include better data and research application, a determined drive and tenacious curiosity. Some key questions include: how can we know the problems of our communities more deeply? How do we understand underlying mechanisms that cause entrenched and systemic community issues? How do we gather useful and accurate data? How do we build knowledge around the role and the importance of community sustainability? How do we align the SDG framework with indigenous aspirations?

The SDG Lab, under the guidance of the Făgăraș Research Institute, confirmed that our network’s SDG project needs sustained commitment and knowledge-building to provide the leadership that our communities need, to tackle the systemic sustainability issues that they face.

Community foundation engagement with the SDGs already has a history through the support of C.S. Mott Foundation.

Nick Deychakiwsky, C.S. Mott Foundation, USA

Since 2019 the Mott Foundation has had an objective, within its Enhancing Community Philanthropy program area, which in turn is part of its Civil Society Program, to help community foundations advance progress toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals at the local level. At the time when we were planning our programmatic objectives, in the latter part of the 2010s, there was optimism about the possibility to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. There also was a realisation that without work to advance the Goals on the local community level, many if not all would not be achieved. At present there is a very different sentiment in the world, where most informed observers acknowledge that most of the goals will not be met by 2030, and in many cases, there is regression rather than progress. It is in this context that a group of representatives of community foundation support organisations from various continents gathered in Cincșor, Romania to have a discussion around community foundations and the SDGs. Many of them have and continue to support community foundations working with, or on, the SDGs. 

At the Mott Foundation, which supports many of these efforts, we have come to the conclusion, following what we’ve learned from many community foundations, is that the point of this work is not really about community foundation helping to achieve the goals globally (although that is of course a good thing), but rather, for community foundations to take advantage of the universal, comprehensive framework that the SDGs offer to increase their impact on the local level. As one expert had aptly put it, riffing off of the famous John F. Kennedy quote: ‘Ask not what you can do for the SDGs, but ask what the SDGs can do for you.’ Indeed, what we have seen is that community foundations have much to gain by using the SDG framework to better understand themselves, to strategise, measure, and communicate impact, to lead, and to be intentional about what changes they wish to help happen in their communities. So – the SDGs can help community foundations be better at what they do on the local level. But a bonus is that the ‘common language’ of the SDGs makes it easier for them to work with and learn from others to get to where they want to go.

James Magowan from the European Community Foundations Initiative (ECFI) reflects on the importance of Place for the SDGs. He argues for adding a 6th P (Place) to the initial five included in Agenda 2030—People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. The importance of Place was highlighted by another participant in Australia:

Dylan Smith, Australia

A growing number of community foundations and placed-based initiatives in Australia have created locally focused reports using both existing and self-sourced data. By and large, these initiatives, for example Vital Signs reports, include SDG’s in some form, linking a local effort to the global. They are also intermittent, often spaced a few years apart, even in the best examples. 

The excellent conversations in Cincșor and Făgăraș helped open up questions not just about the SDGs and how they can be utilised and applied locally but also a broader question. What if community foundations saw themselves as research practitioners and experts in their place? What could it look like to have a community-led research ‘institute’ based in place, continually learning about inequality and social issues playing out in their area? 

This nuanced and highly responsive approach would combine locally created knowledge with community-led resources. Our time together in Romania helped shift my thinking away from the ‘product’ of the SDG’s to the ‘mindset’ of what they could represent and inspire.

An insightful moment in our discussions centred on realising the importance of a ‘research mindset’ that could support community foundations and community foundation support organisations in their practice.

Lutz Drieling, FRI Romania

When we discuss the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and community foundations (CFs), a strong connection becomes apparent, both aim to coordinate efforts and create local impact within a global framework. A recurring theme in this context is the importance of research and research capacity. From my perspective as a researcher, developing the ability to understand, analyse, and apply knowledge is essential, not just for academic work but also for CFs striving to tackle recurring community challenges. Often, these challenges are not entirely new, and many solutions or approaches are transferable. Learning from existing knowledge can inspire new ways to address specific local problems.

The first step in strengthening this capacity, and one that requires no external resources, is adopting a research mindset. This can apply at the individual, team, or organisational level. By ‘research mindset,’ I mean developing an awareness of what knowledge is already available and identifying what is still needed. Once a need, which is specific to the individual, team, or organisation, is identified, a simple online search can be a starting point. While this might sound obvious, it lays the groundwork for understanding issues more deeply, designing better programs, and becoming more responsive to the world around us. Over time, this habit leads to improved skills in sourcing useful information and recognising knowledge gaps.

CFs do not need to transform into think tanks or academic institutions. They only need the confidence and habit of identifying when they lack knowledge and how to fill that gap. Research does not have to be intimidating, embracing a research mindset empowers CFs not only to develop better initiatives but also to understand in a deeper way what is happening around them, what is moving their communities, and how they can play their role in a connected, global reality.

The importance of strong forms of collaboration between community foundations and research organisations is also indicated by Emilia Paz Gonzalez Carmona from Chile. Emila coordinated a study (in Spanish) on the engagement of Latin American foundations with the SDGs. Emilia reflects on the discussions held in Făgăraș and Cincșor, highlighting the importance of building partnerships with research institutions:

Emilia Paz Gonzalez Carmona, Chile

At Cincșor, we discussed the several ways in which academic institutions, be it universities, independent research centres, or even think tanks and policy organisations can support, through their work, the development of a robust community foundation network that expands across different continents, yet each of its members works on a very local scale. Through the different conversations, I believe the very nature of applied social research, global and forward-looking, can be a good complement to the work of community foundations, and more specifically, community foundation support organisations (CFSO’s) based in three elements: contextualisation, assessment and foresight.

The ability to understand a geographical context in their political, social, cultural and economic dimensions, looking to find commonalities and differences across continents and countries, can help CFSO’s learn more strategically about each other. The ability to develop assessment tools and strategies, ranging from operational research to theoretical research, that can help CFSOs get a broader sense of the impact they have on communities, people, local governments, and the philanthropic ecosystem. Being able to aggregate such evidence to strengthen the narrative of this movement could also be helpful. Finally, foresight was a key dimension highlighted not only at Cincșor, while reviewing the SDGs, but throughout the whole week in Bucharest, and I firmly believe that academic institutions, working closely with CFSOs, can help identify trends and developments that CFSOs need to prepare for, and provide training to better help CFSOs address issues such as polarisation, climate change and demographic shifts that alter the daily life of the communities they serve.

Engaging with CFSOs as external research and development branches, and staying connected in a world-wide network, I believe research and evidence-based organisations can support a healthy, resilient community foundation movement.

The Lab opened a discussion on community foundations as part of the research infrastructure of local communities at a time when sustainability challenges are becoming more prominent and multiple types of transformation are affecting societies around the world. Innovation in community foundations and other grantmakers’ ability to work with knowledge capital is essential for strengthening the resilience and sustainability of local communities.

A special thank you to each of the participants as well as to C.S. Mott Foundation and Inspire Institute for supporting the Lab. More about FRI’s work on community foundations and the SDGs can be accessed here.

Stefan Cibian is co-founder and executive director of the Făgăraș Research Institute.

The post Is research relevant for ensuring local community sustainability? Community foundations as knowledge infrastructure for local communities appeared first on Alliance magazine.