M. Gabriela Alcalde, MPH, DrPH’s Post

It's good to see more and more funders leaning toward #trustbasedphilanthropy in the last couple years as we think about how to change power dynamic and accountability by centering the needs of marginalized communities. "This trust-based future requires shifts in philanthropic mindsets and cultures, as well as the structures that scaffold them. It requires funders to relinquish their individual power to achieve a more equitable and democratic future." #socialimpact https://lnkd.in/eZMneZxQ

"Now is the moment to revitalise philanthropy. When the wealthiest give back, they bring their networks and expertise, love for the places they grew up, and passion for the causes that have touched their lives." Think tank @UKonward published an important report last week on the state of philanthropy in the UK, with positive recommendations for the future. Link to the full #GivingBackBetter report below.

Just published! Citi's Philanthropy and the Global Economy v3.0: Perspectives on the Future of Giving. In response to the trend of giving shifting to those that have the means to give at the highest value, Joshua Birkholz, CEO of BWF and Chair of the Board of the Giving USA Foundation, notes that everyone deserves a chance to “experience [the] joy of giving,” and he sees efforts from the nonprofit industry to democratize giving again. https://hubs.li/Q026VY200

Check out this new article featuring our Population and Sustainability Program's research into alternative economic models.

As community power builders and social movement organizers engage in vibrant debates on how to address the immediate expressions and root causes of these multiple crises, social justice funders should take their own hard look at why the problems they have sought to address persist in such an exacerbated form. What can philanthropy do to expand movement power? 1. Focus on power, not policy 2. Trust the field 3. Stick with it for the long haul Read on for more from Nonprofit Quarterly: https://lnkd.in/gNmv2nzp #socialmovements

“The Center for Biological Diversity, Marbleseed, and Wellspring Cooperative provide three examples, from the environmental, agricultural, and worker co-op sectors, of organizations that have shifted over the past few years from single-issue and/or reformist work within the context of capitalism, to embracing a post-capitalist framework of the solidarity economy.” I’m very interested to learn more about solidarity economies after reading this article.

Very interesting article on how important it is to have authentic and trusting philanthropic partnerships to make the biggest impact 💡 “Relationships are far too important to our field to simply hope they develop through goodwill or happenstance. To build a better way of working, philanthropy must commit to new habits and practices. It must become less transactional and more relational. When parties come together, their combined forces can envision new solutions to problems that they could not see apart.”

Not only philanthropic activity, but sense making activities of complex systems in an effort to make changes to the causes and sources of societal/social issues that are upstream and impactful and sustainable, we need new ways of thinking and new tools for engaging. Otto Scharmer.... Stepping up philanthropic activity at the 4.0 level requires shifting the impact focus of philanthropy from downstream (short-term metrics) to upstream (evolving and transforming mindsets and operating systems). These evolutions require an inquiry into the root causes of the challenges we face. An amazing number of change makers worldwide are pursuing these inquiries. But they often must operate in isolation and frequently lack the methods and tools to approach transformative change more consciously and more collectively.

I’m so glad to see this post (thanks, Nathaniel Heller!) because I talk about our weird relationship with risk in philanthropy all the time. Let’s be honest: What are we really risking when we donate to a nonprofit trying to create a better world? The money is a sunk cost, regardless of the outcome of your donation. Yes, your investment in a nonprofit’s work may have only reduced malaria by 70%, and not 100% as you had hoped. Or perhaps there was a setback due to unforeseen changes in the government, or a natural disaster, and now the project may take a little longer. These are still critically needed investments. We are missing the bigger picture: The issues we are trying to solve are large, interconnected social issues that the entire world has been trying to solve. If we knew how to solve them, we would have done so by now. So the *only* thing we can do is try, and that involves investing our resources to create change. Is that risky? I believe our conversations about risk in philanthropy are often backwards. It’s risky NOT to try. It’s risky NOT to invest in the people in closest proximity to the issues. It’s risky NOT to ensure there aren’t voices missing at the table who have historically been left out of the decision making. It’s risky to repeat history because we haven’t learned from it. It’s risky to keep that money sitting in an account at a large bank gaining interest when people are dying and our planet is on fire. It’s risky to stall on being part of the change you want to see because of a fear that a project you invest in might fail, because failure is how we learn. Every day, I see people with much more courage, and much fewer resources, speaking truth to power and fighting for change against all odds. So I invite us all to reconsider what we are truly risking when it comes to investing in a better world.

💡 This article is required reading for anyone in philanthropy; it asks why--if philanthropy has grown by an inflation-adjusted 300% in the last 40 years--have poverty rates in the US remain unchanged? The answer is not increasing private philanthropy, but rather investing in civil society so that government is forced to invest in the needs of its people. Steve Phillips has **done the work** (along with his late wife Susan Sandler), to drive investments in democracy-focused work like voter engagement and power building. He knows first-hand what's needed, and he and Mark Kramer build an incredibly strong case against continuing the philanthropic status quo. Most of all this: "In fact, the current model of philanthropy is not only misleading but dangerous. Philanthropists’ central focus on using the nonprofit sector to address society’s challenges deflects attention from the dire need for a functioning, representative, multiracial democracy, without which we can never achieve a more equitable and sustainable nation."