Why donations alone don't build community trust

A ‘major’ donor said to me once “The only reason I give honestly is because of you." While it might sound like the ultimate compliment, it’s actually a red flag. Here’s why: Donors should be engaged through a hearts-and-minds approach, but not just a single person. Of course, part of my job is building trust and personal connections—but if I’m the only contact for that donor, we’ve got a problem. Sustainable funding is the goal…not just immediate dollars in the door driven by one person. If the donor doesn’t trust at least two other people at the organization, I haven’t set them up to truly invest in the work itself. My charm might open the door, but their belief in the mission is what weaves them into the ecosystem. They shouldn’t just be riding for me—they should be riding for the impact, the purpose, the vision. So yeah, it’s a cute moment for my ego, but it also means I needed to organize my team and do a little more. Program staff touchpoints beyond the development folks are crucial. Donor relationships that depend solely on me don’t ensure longevity—and this work demands sustainability. Make sure folks are riding for your work, not just you. #SustainableFunding #BuildingTrust #AskSadé #SadeKnows

How philanthropy can better support frontline leaders and environmental movements [At Climate Week, I joined a Global Greengrants Fund-led discussion with grassroots leaders that offered a sharp view of how philanthropy meets—and sometimes misses—the realities of frontline work.] Philanthropy is purportedly rooted in a ‘love of humanity’, yet its operating systems are often transactional. “Philanthropy” encompasses everything from small family foundations to major multilateral donors, but common norms—short grant cycles, risk aversion, and a preference for quantifiable results—shape behavior even among those seeking to work differently. For many frontline conservation and climate justice groups, traditional approaches to giving can feel misaligned with the realities they face. Too often, donors equate success with what can be counted: hectares protected, tons of carbon sequestered, beneficiaries reached. Yet much of the real progress happens outside those metrics. A woman leader challenging taboos in her community, villagers reviving their language, or waste pickers forming cooperatives after exchange visits—these are not “soft” outcomes but signs of resilience. The challenge is not measurement itself but learning to value change that resists easy quantification. A more adaptive ethos would treat grants as relationships rather than contracts, underwriting learning, pivots, and even failure. One youth climate organizer described a $2,000 grant in West Africa that initially flopped. A decade later, the same group had won a national award for emissions-reduction work in the same municipality—an outcome enabled by funders who stayed the course after the first donor’s support ended. Protecting those who protect nature requires investing in people’s well-being and staying power, not only their deliverables. Flexibility, though, is most effective when paired with transparency and mutual trust. Money alone rarely shifts power; the governance of money does. Community leaders seldom sit on foundation boards or advisory groups, yet their participation can recalibrate priorities and improve accountability. Some restoration programs overlook the less visible work of community organizing, even though such engagement is vital to long-term success. Real lives are not lived in thematic silos, yet philanthropy often rewards narrow proposals. All of this unfolds amid growing strain—forest loss, shrinking civic space, and a mental-health crisis within conservation. Short-term funding and job insecurity amplify stress; predictable support allows people to plan, rest, and sustain their commitment. Systemic challenges like climate change demand long-term patience and humility. Philanthropy will not fix global inequities, but it can practice disciplined optimism: funding for resilience, not just results. The path forward lies in trust-based support, shared governance, and the resolve to apply well-known principles with consistency and care.

Spending Review There’s a parable often (wrongly) attributed to Einstein: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.” And yet… That’s exactly how I felt reading the announcement of new funding for “trailblazer communities” in the recent Spending Review. At first glance, it sounds promising. Long-term investment. Commitments to housing, transport, health. But it also sounds like pouring money into communities based on what’s wrong rather than what’s strong. Neighbourhood Renewal 2.0. Remember Neighbourhood Renewal? When the aim was to “narrow the gap”? Check the data. It didn’t work. The areas that topped the deprivation indices back then? They’re all still there. Don’t get me wrong, any investment is welcome especially in these tough times. But is it really too much to ask that we learn from the past? Money is a powerful force for change. So powerful that it can derail the very change it’s meant to support. Instead of asking: “What’s already working well around here?” And “How might we strengthen it?” …the question becomes: “How are we going to spend this money?” Because most institutions don’t really trust communities, the little amount of funding that filters through the bureaucracy is more focussed on: “What rules do we need to stop local people running off to Scarborough with the money”? And just like that, the natural, relational, grounded ways that change actually happens in a place are drowned out by targets, KPIs and funding criteria. Politicians want change to be done to people, so they can shout about it come election time — instead of change that’s done with people. Or better yet, led by people. But that kind of work takes trust. And as Cormac Russell says, “this work goes at the speed of trust.” Top down funding often hits communities like a tide. A surge of activity (and lanyards) then it recedes. What’s left in its wake? Communities picking up the pieces. Again. If we want change that sticks, we have to stop flooding places with deficit-based, money-led, target-driven interventions. We need to invest in the strengths, relationships and deep-rooted wisdom that already exist. Genuinely involve people in setting the agenda. Make space for local leadership. Inviting communities in to real decision making (not performative window dressing). Just look at the amazing work of Angela Fell & the team at Northern Heart & Soul alongside others as part of Grass Roots of Wigan. But I don’t get the sense that this Spending Review is anything more than chucking money at the usual service-led interventions. It’s more of the same and we know how that story ends. #spendingreview #powerwithnotpowerover #strongnotwrong I’m Chris, a socially engaged Photographer and filmmaker with a background in Community Development. I help people visualise the important stuff. ✊ Graphic shared via Cormac Russell of Nurture Development and created by Graham Ogilvie

To my brothers and sisters in the diaspora—let me talk to you straight. I know how hard you work. Two jobs. Long nights. Shifts that eat into your weekends. You’ve learned to live with the cold, the loneliness, and the sacrifice — because you believe your sweat is building a better future back home. But sometimes, the only thing your money is building is someone else’s bar tab. That “plot” your cousin promised to buy? Still bushland. That “business” your brother said is running? The only thing running is his mouth. That “house” your aunt swore would be finished by December? Three Decembers later, it’s still a foundation with cows grazing on it. Meanwhile, you keep sending money—faithfully, religiously—because family guilt is a strong weapon. They tell you, “We’re doing this for you.” But are they really? I’ve seen it too many times: A man sends dollars home for years, only to come back and find strangers living on his “land.” A woman works 16-hour days abroad, only to discover her “investment” is a cousin’s side hustle in alcohol. Entire families abroad end up broke, while relatives back home become “suddenly rich” off money they never worked for. Here’s the reality: love doesn’t mean blind trust. If you don’t demand accountability, you’re not building. You’re donating. So my advice is simple: 1. Stop sending money without proof. 2. Demand receipts. Demand photos. Demand results. 3. Better yet, cut out the middleman and invest directly — even if it’s slower. Because nothing is more painful than sweating in snow while your money is sweating in the bar. At the end of the day, your family’s future is too important to gamble on “trust.” Build it yourself, with your own hands, and with your own eyes on the ground. “Distance makes the heart grow fonder, but it also makes your wallet grow thinner — if you trust the wrong people.”

When I first moved to New York, I had no visa, no credit history, and not a single person to call. What I did have was a bike. At 5 a.m. in Central Park, I found a crew of diehards who showed up rain or shine. Olympic athletes. Wall Street tycoons. And the "men of the park" — guys logging miles with religious devotion. We weren't trading business cards. We were sweating side by side. It was the original LinkedIn — only with helmets and rain gear. That cycling crew became my first real community in the city. We celebrated wins, grieved losses, and yes — occasionally dragged abandoned furniture up six flights of stairs for each other. Here's what most people miss:  A subscription isn't community. Community is built through showing up and giving something of yourself. The Unspoken Layer: Money can open doors. But it can't create the kind of trust that comes from relying on someone in the rain at 5 a.m. Contribution is the true currency of connection. So the next time you think about "building community," don't add a price tag. Add a way for people to show up for each other. That's where the magic happens. #RelationshipCapital #TrustEconomics #CommunityArchitecture #Influence

Your donors need to see you, but you're hiding. You think being the visible leader makes you uncomfortable? Try explaining to your board why donations are down 30% because donors don't trust leadership they never see. Let me walk you through what donor invisibility actually costs you: Your major donor prospect researches your organization online before considering a $50,000 gift. They find program descriptions, staff bios, and impact statistics. But they can't find a single piece of content from you - the person who will be stewarding their investment. No blog posts sharing your vision. No videos explaining your strategy. No social media presence showing your leadership perspective. You're completely absent from the donor's decision-making process. Meanwhile, you're frustrated that donors "don't understand" your organization's value or "aren't connecting" with your mission. They can't connect with someone they can't see. Your donors aren't just funding programs. They're investing in leadership they believe can execute those programs effectively. When you hide behind organizational messaging, you're asking them to write checks to an anonymous entity. The most successful nonprofit leaders I work with understand that donor relationships are built on personal trust, AND institutional credibility. Their donors know their leadership philosophy, their strategic thinking, and their personal commitment to the mission. You don't have to become a social media influencer or write daily blog posts. But you do need to be visible enough that donors can evaluate whether they trust you with their investment. Your discomfort with visibility is costing your organization more than your comfort with anonymity is worth. Stop hiding and start showing donors the leader who makes those programs possible. Because in fundraising, people give to people they trust, not organizations they can't identify with leadership they've never seen.

What a week this has been! Much appreciation to CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation for bringing over 30 nationalities together to deliberate what is working and what can be done differently in the civic space, especially with the advent of new funding dynamics and emerging protectionist funding patterns. Here are the key take aways. 🤝 Trust is the missing currency. Donors often ask for big results and neat measurements — but this forces local groups to bend, reframe, and perform. When trust is absent, control creeps in. Real change starts when communities define their own success — with care, flexibility, and truth-telling at the center. 🎯 Strategy attracts power — just ask the right-wing. “The right-wing movement in the US grew fast because their donors funded strategy.” Not projects. Not compliance. Strategy. If we want systems change, we need to back grassroots visions before the results, not after. ⚖️ Intermediaries are caught in a pressure sandwich. Between macro-level donors and micro-level grassroots, meso organizations are absorbing all the compliance risk. But here lies an opportunity: to redesign accountability models that reflect values, not just checklists — and help donors unburden their own bureaucracy. 🔄  Funding gaps aren’t the only problem — relational gaps are. When funders and implementers operate on mismatched rhythms, expectations, and measures of value, even the best grants miss the mark. Accountability, when done right, is about preserving what we truly care about — not just reporting what fits the form. 🚨 After USAID, the cracks are visible. Open calls sound inclusive — until a crisis hits. The USAID termination reminded everyone that one-sided exits and rigid compliance create fragility. What’s emerging now is a pattern of protectionist funding: shorter-term, safer bets, fewer risks. This is not a funding crisis alone — it’s a call to build trust-based, resilient systems from the ground up. This is the reason we at MoFund Africa are purely focussed on African philanthropy, and pooling funds to invest in African initiatives & innovations. Its time we took care of our selves, also because we can! #ShiftThePower #CIVICUS2025 #DonorDialogues #TrustBasedFunding #StrategicPhilanthropy #Localization #CivilSociety