Confessions of a Fundraiser

February 2, 2026 Leave a comment

By a Head of Development, who has been there, done that. 

I have spent a good part of my career raising funds for livelihoods and entrepreneurship, environmental sustainability, and digital inclusion. These are kinds of work that everyone agrees are deeply important, and expects to be delivered at miraculous speed, near-zero overheads, and with measurable transformation visible by the next board meeting! Over the years, I have learned that in India’s funding universe, March is not just a month but a mood, where phone calls are returned with unprecedented urgency, proposals are rediscovered with fresh enthusiasm, and sustainability plans are requested even before the first grant tranche has cleared. I have learnt to speak fluently about empowerment while explaining, with equal conviction, why empowerment requires trainers, coordinators, field activities, local transport, and a field office. I have learnt that pilots can run for a decade and still be called pilots, that social impact is expected to be both transformative and inexpensive, and that the most common expression of donor admiration is, ‘This is excellent work. Can you replicate in two districts with 20% less budget?’ And yet, I have also learnt that when trust is built patiently, and partnerships are approached as shared responsibility rather than transactional funding, the system does work, unevenly, imperfectly, but often just in time.

If you ever want to test your emotional resilience, professional patience, and metaphysical belief in destiny, try becoming a fundraiser for social impact in India. Not as a hobby or a phase in life, but as a full-time, salaried, KPI-driven profession where your success is measured in crores raised, relationships sustained, and hopes renewed, often all before lunch. Fundraising in India is not a job; it is a personality type. It is a slow-burning spiritual practice. It is also, on some days, a contact sport.

Most fundraisers do not grow up dreaming of this life. No child has ever said, ‘When I grow up, I want to write concept notes, follow up politely seven times, and still be told the CSR budget has already been exhausted for this year.’ Fundraisers are usually people who joined the development sector with good intentions and then stayed because they discovered a rare combination of optimism, masochism, and an above-average tolerance for ambiguity. In India, fundraising also requires fluency in multiple dialects, not linguistic ones, but donor dialects. You must speak CSR, philanthropy, family office, multilateral, HNI, trust, and the particularly tricky language known as ‘let’s take this offline.’

Every fundraising journey begins with a proposal that is equal parts strategy and speculative fiction. A document that must be simultaneously visionary and realistic, innovative yet ‘scalable,’ rooted in community voice and at the same time aligned to the donor’s thematic priorities for the current financial year. The proposal must do many things at once: ‘Solve poverty + empower women + be sustainable by the third year + align with SDGs (preferably all of them) + cost exactly the amount the funder has available + have low overheads but world-class MEL.’ You will spend weeks refining language, perfecting logframes, and polishing budgets, only to be asked in the first meeting, ‘Can you explain this in two lines?’ You will smile, compress your knowledge of years of community work into a sentence, and remind yourself that clarity is a virtue, even when it hurts.

Sooner or later, every fundraiser in India faces the great philosophical question of our time: Why do you need staff to run a project? Recently, another question got added to my great list when a funder asked me, ‘Why do you need field offices to implement a community-based high-touch project?’ Mind you, I managed a straight-faced answer, without any smirk or sarcasm, even though I cursed the day I decided to be a fundraiser.

Admin costs are a suspicious category in the minds of Indian donors. They include dangerous items like salaries, rent, electricity, and internet, none of which, apparently, contribute to impact. As a fundraiser, you become adept at explaining that projects do not run on goodwill and sunlight alone. That field teams do not teleport. That data does not collect itself. You learn to say ‘lean but adequate,’ ‘efficient yet ethical,’ and ‘value for money’ with full sincerity. I have even attempted some humour at times on the negotiation tables, saying, ‘Without admin costs, the project will still exist, but just as an idea.’ Results vary post such statements.

What I have understood is that fundraising in India is less about money and more about relationships. Money is merely the by-product of trust built over years, conversations, coffees, conferences, and carefully worded WhatsApp messages. I have learnt that a ‘quick call’ can last an hour or more, a ‘small grant’ can require six levels of approvals and may take two years; silence doesn’t mean rejection (or acceptance); words from leadership are golden, but if you don’t have that in writing, you are screwed. The fundraiser’s greatest skill is not writing; it is patience. You patiently wait for responses, for board meetings, for the next quarter, for the funder who loved your work but is noncommittal. You wait with optimism, and dignified reminders, gentle ones every couple of weeks.

Then comes the project visit by the funder, usually by some of their board members and senior leadership. Often, they bring moments of high drama along with it. For the donor, it is a glimpse into our community-connect and implementation efficiency. For a fundraiser, it often turns into a logistical marathon involving vehicles, weather, community leaders, beneficiaries, translators, photographers, and a strong hope that nothing goes wrong. In all such visits, we fundraisers pray to some invisible power that the roads are navigable, community meetings start on time, funder’s visibility is primed, and no one asks an unplanned question about funding gaps. If all goes well, the funder says, ‘This is so impactful.’ You nod, beaming. You make a mental note to follow up in three days. At the beginning of my fundraising career in India two decades ago, I often ended up being shocked by the variety of demands by donor representatives visiting project sites. Thanks to the information age, the visiting representatives nowadays are well informed and often invested in social change.

Fundraisers also live at the intersection of data and dignity, translating lived experience into metrics without stripping it of meaning.Indian donors want data and stories, and at times, even at the cost of losing the bigger picture. You learn to convert human change into numbers without losing the soul of the work. You say things like, ‘4025 women trained’, and then you add, ‘Meet Sunita, who now earns independently and negotiates at home.’ You know that neither is sufficient alone, and the narrative together, they might just unlock the next tranche.

How can I forget the ultimate sword of big NO! Rejection is a constant companion of us fundraisers, like a dark shadow. Sometimes polite, sometimes vague, and sometimes dressed up as ‘great work, but not this year.’ You learn not to take it personally, mostly. You also learn that today’s rejection can be tomorrow’s opportunity, because India’s funding ecosystem is small, relational, and cyclical. The donor who said no last year may say yes next year, after changing jobs, priorities, or perspectives. So you keep the door open, always.

Fundraising is emotional labour. You hold hope for communities, for organisations, for teams whose salaries depend on your ability to convince someone that change is worth investing in. You are optimistic on behalf of others, even on days you feel tired. You absorb anxiety, translate urgency, and project confidence. You celebrate quietly when funds come through, and cushion disappointment when they don’t. You are expected to be resilient, persuasive, strategic, and endlessly positive. No one tells you this in job descriptions.

And yet, despite the follow-ups, the spreadsheets, the rejections, the ‘please reduce your budget by 15-20%,’ and often ending up becoming a football between the funder and the grantee management, we choose to stay. Because once in a while, a funder truly listens. Once in a while, a partnership feels equal. Once in a while, funding aligns perfectly with need, timing, and trust. And in those moments, you remember why fundraising matters. Because social impact does not scale on passion alone. It scales on resources, relationships, and people willing to ask again and again for something better.

So here’s to the fundraisers in India: The translators. The bridge-builders. The professional optimists. May your proposals be read, your follow-ups answered, and your impact always exceed your budgets. And may you never lose your sense of humour. Wishing you strong coffee, timely approvals, and generous funders, today and always.

May the force be with you! 

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of any organisation, foundation, CSR, non-profit or others. This is a humorous attempt, and not angst, and certainly no disrespect for donors and funders of social impact.)

(Cover image is generated using AI)

Filed under Opinions, Social Impact Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why Philanthropy Needs to Evolve

November 10, 2025 Leave a comment

Philanthropy has been a force for good across continents, building hospitals, funding schools and universities, feeding communities in crises, taking action to solve social challenges, and underwriting research. While intending to create positive and lasting change in people’s lives and strengthening communities, often, take the form of that giving is the classic ‘donor → beneficiary’ pipeline, which has serious limits. When well-meaning philanthropic entities simply transfer money or material goods to presumed beneficiaries without sharing power, listening deeply, or tracking outcomes with humility, aid can be inefficient, short-lived, and even harmful. To move from transactional charity to transformative social change, philanthropy must evolve toward participatory, locally led, and evidence-based models that empower communities to define problems, choose solutions, and steward resources. Several philanthropic models need to evolve into a new, pluralistic philanthropy that can deliver better, fairer, and more sustainable impact.

The donor-beneficiary model often centres on donors’ priorities. Funders set agendas, design programs, select implementing partners, and measure success by indicators they choose, often from a distance. This creates several structural problems, like,

  • Power asymmetry occurs when donors decide what counts as a problem and which solutions are legitimate. Communities become recipients rather than partners, and local knowledge is sidelined, reducing relevance and local ownership.
  • Templates developed for ease of scale often ignore social-cultural and political nuances at the local level. Programs that look good in donor reports may fail on the ground due to ‘One-size-fits-all interventions.’
  • Short funding horizons and volatility of donors with grants tied to campaign cycles, leftover funds, or financial year budgets can stop abruptly, leaving services unsustainable and organisations stranded.
  • When philanthropy substitutes for systemic public investment, it can relieve governments of responsibility or create dependency among groups who lack the voice to advocate for longer-term change.
  • Donors are accountable to boards or taxpayers, with limited accountability to the communities they aim to serve; evaluation is often internal and narrowly framed.

These limitations are not theoretical as reviews of philanthropic practice repeatedly find that participation is often performative, i.e., consultation exercises without power transfer. Scholarly and practitioner literature has called out the gap between rhetoric and sustainable commitment to community-led approaches. This is the moment for a pivot to an evolved philanthropic approach that can complement the traditional giving through,

  1. Participatory and community-led decision-making: Communities should help set priorities and co-design programs. Participatory grant-making moves power to those closest to problems, bringing lived experience into funding decisions and increasing the legitimacy and likely effectiveness of interventions.
  • Local leadership and capacity building: Funding should invest in local institutions (community groups, cooperatives, NGOs, social enterprises), and not only project outputs. That means unrestricted core support, leadership development, and multi-year commitments that enable organisations to mature and adapt.
  • Data-driven learning and accountability: Rigorous use of data and learning systems can help tailor solutions, track impact, and course correct. Data must be used ethically, with local ownership and attention to privacy and power dynamics.

When combined, this approach will shift philanthropy from a mere supplier of goods to an enabler of agency. Some good practices from around the world show how participatory and locally led philanthropy can function in practice, and who can act as torchbearers for philanthropic communities in their regions.

Indian philanthropic institutions combine traditional grant-making with newer models. Tata Trusts has invested heavily in the Data-Driven Governance (DELTA: Data, Evaluation, Learning, Technology, and Analysis) framework for strengthening local governance and planning. Their approach works with government entities and communities to build data systems that inform local decision-making rather than impose external solutions. This demonstrates how philanthropy can facilitate evidence-based public systems while engaging local institutions rather than bypassing them.  

Azim Premji University and Foundation have made community engagement in educational work prominent, emphasising long-term partnerships with local schools and communities rather than one-off interventions. Their community engagement model underscores the importance of listening, iterative learning, and strengthening public institutions rather than substituting for them.  

In Southeast Asia, funder collaboratives demonstrate a shift from isolated donors to pooled funds that support locally relevant priorities. The Asia Community Foundation’s 30×30 Southeast Asia Ocean Fund, launched in January 2025, is a recent example. The fund pools resources to protect coastal and marine ecosystems with an emphasis on inclusion and equity, supporting local stewards and communities rather than exporting conservation blueprints. Collaborative funds like this allow donors to align with regional expertise, reduce duplication, and focus on communities affected by interventions.  

The USA has been an incubator for participatory grant-making experiments. Major foundations and movements, spurred by crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic and racial-justice mobilisations, have explored models that transfer decision-making authority to communities. For instance, mainstream philanthropic institutions like Ford Foundation have published reflections on why participatory grant-making mattered during crises and how it can be institutionalised, noting its capacity to surface local priorities and accelerate equitable responses. While the U.S. landscape is mixed (with many foundations still operating traditionally), the growing body of practice shows that community-led funding can be both rapid and rights-respecting when donors cede control.  

The literature and practice of participatory and community-led philanthropy are growing across Africa, rooted in traditional values of solidarity, mutuality, and shared support. Researchers and practitioners have documented participatory grant-making and community governance innovations, arguing that ceding decision rights to local actors helps align funding with local priorities and sustains outcomes. While capacity and infrastructure challenges exist, the momentum toward locally governed funding systems is notable in contexts where external donors historically dominated the agenda. Recent examples of participatory grant-making (such as Harambee in Kenya, Ujamaa in Tanzania, and Ubuntu across the continent) synthesise these trends and highlight both promise and challenges.  

Participation, local leadership, and data are crucial for effective philanthropy because they shift power dynamics, increase relevance and impact, and improve decision-making based on evidence rather than assumption. This approach moves away from traditional, top-down models toward more equitable, efficient, and sustainable processes. Participatory philanthropy and grant-making processes will lead to,

  • Greater relevance when communities help design interventions, uptake and adaptation increase. Local actors understand cultural norms, political constraints, and practical hurdles that external project designers often miss.
  • Sustainability of programs that are owned by communities beyond the grant cycle. Unrestricted support and capacity building enable organisations to respond flexibly to emerging needs.
  • Data systems that include local stakeholders enable rapid feedback loops, like what’s not working can be quickly spotted and fixed, and successes can be scaled responsibly, improving impact through iterative learning.
  • Participatory philanthropy is not neutral, as it intentionally rebalances power by giving those affected by problems a say in solutions.
  • Cost-effectiveness through local knowledge increases returns on investment.

To evolve to the new and effective models of philanthropy, funders should take practical steps such as shifting money and power by moving a significant percentage of grant money into participatory processes and community-governed pools. They should offer multi-year, unrestricted funding and simplify application and reporting requirements. Investing in intermediary infrastructure is crucial, so supporting local philanthropy platforms, community foundations, and capacity builders, incubators, and accelerators who can channel funds and help communities administer grants is essential. Building data partnerships with communities by funding local data systems, such as community scorecards, participatory monitoring, and open data platforms that are owned and governed by communities, while ensuring ethical data practices, is also important. Co-designing evaluation frameworks with community actors to develop success metrics that prioritise outcomes valued by the community, such as economic stability, dignity, and local governance, rather than just donor KPIs, is very much required. Additionally, funders should reward adaptive learning by creating grant mechanisms that allow for iteration of ‘pilot-learn-adapt-scale’ rather than penalising change as ‘failure.’ Lastly, funders should role model humility and plan for their responsible exit by strengthening local institutions so they can sustain without perpetual external support.

However, it’s important to understand that not every ‘participatory’ label signals a real transfer of power. Donors must avoid superficial practices, like convening consultations for optics, creating advisory committees without decision rights, or funding only projects that align with preselected agendas. Genuine participation requires structural changes like in the boards, budgets, and governance processes, that reflect shared authority.

Philanthropy has great potential to speed up solutions to poverty, climate change, governance problems, and social inequality. To shift from charity to meaningful change, funders need to be willing to relax control, invest in local leaders, and support strong, community-led data and learning systems. Examples from India, Southeast Asia, the U.S., and Africa demonstrate various approaches such as data partnerships that improve governance, pooled funds that empower local stewards, and participatory grant making that changes who makes decisions. Effective, equitable, and sustainable change emerges when those affected by problems help define and lead the response. Philanthropy’s evolution from a one-way pipeline of resources to a platform for shared power is not just desirable, it’s necessary if we want charitable funding to do more than temporarily relieve suffering. They must catalyse systems that let communities thrive on their own terms.

Download Philanthropy Assessment Tool, a practical self-assessment for equitable and transformative philanthropy by funders, family offices, foundations, and CSR.

Philanthropy Assessment ToolDownload

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of any organisation, foundation, CSR, non-profit or others.)

Filed under Social Impact Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Navigating the Road to Sustainability for Nonprofits in India

September 11, 2024 Leave a comment

Source: Idea taken from Foraker group model

Sustainability has become a buzzword across industries, and for nonprofits in India, it’s more than just a trend—it’s a necessity! Sustainability in the nonprofit sector is a critical issue that encompasses not only environmental stewardship but also financial stability, organizational resilience, and long-term impact. Nonprofits, by their nature, are dedicated to addressing social, economic, and environmental challenges, often with limited resources and high expectations. With India’s rapid economic shifts and evolving social landscape, understanding and overcoming these hurdles is essential for nonprofits striving to make a lasting difference.

Key Challenges Facing Nonprofits in India

1. Funding Instability:  One of the most significant challenges facing nonprofits is financial instability. Nonprofits rely heavily on donor contributions, government grants, and CSR grants, which can be unpredictable and subject to economic fluctuations. Furthermore, many donors prefer to fund specific projects rather than general operations, leaving nonprofits vulnerable to financial shortfalls. The global economy, changing donor priorities, and a lack of diversified income streams often impact an organization’s ability to plan and execute long-term projects. This gets further compounded by competition among nonprofits for limited resources.

Nonprofits must constantly innovate and demonstrate their impact to attract and retain donors. This requires significant investment in fundraising and partnership strategies, donor relations, and marketing, which are resource-intensive and divert attention from core mission activities, often resulting in chicken-egg situations.

2. Administrative and Operational Inefficiencies:  Many nonprofits in India struggle with limited administrative resources and inefficient operational practices. Limited resources lead to outdated technologies, inefficient processes, and a lack of professional expertise. Inefficiencies in management, compliance, accounting, and reporting undermine the effectiveness of programs and reduce transparency, negatively impacting stakeholders and donors’ trust. This is more challenging for smaller organizations with limited administrative capacity.

3. Regulatory and Compliance Maze: Managing the complex regulatory landscape in India is challenging for nonprofits. Compliance with legal requirements, such as the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) and the Goods and Services Tax (GST), requires careful attention to detail and significant administrative effort. Changes in regulations and stringent reporting requirements add to the administrative burden. Staying compliant while adapting to new regulations can strain organizational resources and divert attention from mission-critical activities.

4. Capacity Building and Skill Gaps: The nonprofit sector often faces challenges related to human resources. There is a growing need for skilled professionals who can handle strategic planning, fundraising, and program management, leading to organizational sustainability. The sector often faces challenges in attracting and retaining skilled professionals due to budget constraints and lower salaries compared to the private sector.

Capacity building requires investing in learning and development for employees. However, many organizations lack the resources to provide comprehensive training programs or to hire experienced professionals. This often limits their ability to effectively manage programs, drive strategic initiatives, and ensure organizational growth.

5. Measuring Impact: Measuring and presenting evidence-backed impact is essential for donor confidence and organizational effectiveness. Nonprofits need to develop robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks to assess the outcomes and effectiveness of their programs. However, many organizations struggle with setting up these systems due to limited resources and expertise.

 Strategies for Enhancing Sustainability

1. Diversifying Funding Sources: To address funding instability, nonprofits need to explore multiple revenue streams. This includes engaging in social entrepreneurship and blended finance opportunities, establishing partnerships with businesses, leveraging online crowdfunding platforms, and digital fundraising. Creating a diversified funding base helps in reducing dependency on a single source and enhances financial stability.

2. Leveraging and Embracing Technology: Technology offers significant opportunities for enhancing operational efficiency and reach. Digital tools can streamline administrative processes, improve data management, and facilitate better communication with stakeholders through online platforms and social media. Adopting technology also opens avenues for online fundraising and virtual program delivery such as webinars, workshops, and training.

3. Building Stronger Partnerships: Collaboration with other nonprofits, governmental agencies, and private sector organizations can amplify the impact of initiatives and improve sustainability. Strategic partnerships can provide access to additional resources, expertise, and networks. Strategic alliances can also lead to cost savings through shared services and joint initiatives. By working together, organizations can leverage each other’s strengths, reduce duplication of efforts, and achieve greater impact.

4. Investing in Human Capital: Prioritizing the development of human resources is crucial for organizational growth and sustainability. Nonprofits should invest in training and capacity-building programs for their staff and volunteers through training programs, workshops, and professional development opportunities. Creating a culture of continuous learning and career advancement opportunities can enhance program delivery, improve management practices, organizational resilience, and employee retention. Leadership development is particularly important for long-term sustainability. Cultivating strong leaders within the organization can drive strategic planning, innovation, and effective decision-making.

5. Enhancing Transparency and Accountability: Building trust with stakeholders through transparency and accountability is essential for long-term success. Nonprofits should adopt the best practices in financial management, regularly publish impact reports, and engage in open communication with donors and stakeholders. Transparency not only attracts more funding but also strengthens community support. Implementing robust internal controls and conducting regular audits can help maintain financial integrity and accountability. Additionally, engaging stakeholders in decision-making processes and soliciting feedback can enhance organizational credibility and responsiveness.

6. Adopting Sustainable Practices: Integrating sustainability into program design and organizational operations can drive long-term impact. Nonprofits should consider the environmental impact of their activities and seek to minimize their footprint. This might involve adopting green practices, such as reducing waste, conserving energy, and promoting eco-friendly initiatives. Sustainable practices also include ensuring the long-term viability of programs. This involves designing initiatives that can be sustained over time, building local capacity, and fostering community ownership. By promoting sustainability within programs, nonprofits can create a transformative impact.

The road to nonprofit sustainability is full of challenges, but with innovation, partnership, and a commitment to continuous improvement, nonprofits can navigate these challenges and continue to make a meaningful impact on society.  As the sector is continuously evolving, embracing sustainability will be key to ensuring that nonprofits can adapt to changing circumstances continue to remain steadfast in their mission, and drive positive social change for years to come.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of any organization, foundation, CSR, non-profit or others

Filed under Opinions, Social Impact Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Impact Funding in the time of COVID-19

June 19, 2020 Leave a comment

Photo source: The New Humanitarian

The global pandemic COVID-19 has triggered the most severe economic recession in nearly a century and is causing enormous damage to people’s health, jobs, and well-being. It has changed the social sector landscape and will continue to impact the sector for the next few years. In the short term, since March 2020, change in the funding trends is already being witnessed by non-profits, especially of the CSR in India, with majority of them contributing to the PM Cares, CM Relief Funds and contributions towards local relief work like food and PPE distribution. The unexpected crisis created due to migrant labour returning to their home states, we are witnessing some of the bigger CSRs channeling their funds towards ‘Rehabilitation during and post COVID-19’ phase with a focus on re-skilling, sustainable livelihoods and job creation, BCC, and food & nutrition security.

Until the next 12-18 months, there will be opportunities for partnerships under the ‘rehabilitation lens’ across geographies, but more focused on states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Assam, and Jharkhand. Apart from relief & rehabilitation, Health (preventive health, strengthening local health systems at block and village levels, and co-morbidity diseases like TB, HIV/AIDS, Diabetes, etc.) and Education (especially working with a sudden increase in out-of-school-children due to in-migration, and skilling School teachers in rural and sub-urban India in virtual classrooms, course development and delivery, and digital communication) are other areas, where donor funds are potentially going to be invested. In other areas, especially environment and climate change (unless CSRs & foundation’s core focus is environment), it is bound to be severe funding cuts (40%-60% from pre-COVID times) over short to mid-term.

Non-profits need to continue building strong partnership with their existing CSR Partners, to continue getting support to even those projects that are not COVID aligned, and build new partnerships using COVID aligned models. It is expected that Government funding will increase and so will partnership opportunities in most of the areas like livelihoods, education and health using innovative implementation mechanisms and digital communication. The World Bank has announced large assistance programs for India, which will be implemented through state governments and may bring non-profits with the opportunities of large partnerships between now and 2025. The current changed funding trend will more or less continue in 2021. However bigger CSR and foundations will see a potential downside of 30-50% in their funding allocations.

As restrictions are being eased world-wide, the path to global economic recovery remains highly uncertain with 6-7.5% negative growth in 2020, it is expected to climb back to around 2.8-3% in 2021 and move slowly towards recovery. In the long run, 2022-25, when both national and international economies are strongly on the recovery path, it is expected that several international aid agencies, which had stopped direct funding in Indian development sector, once again will open a window for 3-5 years of funding, and number of funding opportunities for India and other developing countries will increase. Historically, post mega disaster comes the golden period of funding for impact sector. It is a phase, and it too shall pass. Together, we will continue to drive change and together we will prevail.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of any organization, foundation, CSR, non-profit or others.

Filed under Social Impact Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,