Power in philanthropy has traditionally been held – almost exclusively – by those with the money. There are calls to change that, and mercifully many initiatives and examples of it happening. Giving Evidence’s Director Caroline Fiennes was asked to speak at an event about this, and categorised some of them. Do send other examples / initiatives, and categories!
| Type of shift | Example / initiative |
| Determining priorities for the whole fnd | David Sainsbury / Gatsby setting up (endowing) independent fnds in East Africa |
| Determining who gets funded | Participatory grant-making, e.g., EDGE Fund |
| Enabling the intended beneficiaries (the individuals) to decide what the money is spent on[1] | Cash transfers |
| Enabling the intended beneficiaries (individuals / community) to determine priorities | – Reverse call for proposals recently issued in Zambia. Communities decided what they wanted, put out a shopping list and asked NGOs to bid for what they could do. Then the communities decide which NGOs will do the work.[2] – Taxation[3] |
| Enabling the grantee to decide what the money is spent on, incl. responding rapidly to changing needs | Unrestricted funding |
| Increasing the accountability of funders | – Foundation Practice Rating – Global Giving UK which has an AGM open to anybody |
| Increasing transparency of what funders are funding | 360 Giving |
| Incentivising (some) funders to behave less like medieval royalty | – Open & Trusting Philanthropy – Modern Grantmaking? |
| Encouraging / enabling funders to (opt to) listen to grantees & prospective grantees | Grantee Perception Reports Grant Advisor |
Some other examples are suggested here, and not yet categorised.
Do foundations & charities have meetings which anybody can observe, or at which anybody can ask a question? Giving Evidence surveyed the 20 largest foundations & charities in the UK & US (~80) in total. Answer: mainly no. See here.
[1] Note that cash transfers to individuals are great for empowerment around household expenditure etc. They are obviously unlikely to produce new / improved shared infrastructure such as roads or schools.
[2] https://www.zgf.org.zm/reverse-call-for-proposals/
[3] Caitlin Tulloch suggested this, saying “only joking a little bit”. It’s a fair point: taxation in a functioning democracy is supposed to be precisely like this.
giving-evidence.com 