Subscribe
Hilary Pearson

It’s January again, time for forward looks (and a backward glance or two). In this post, I do some of both. In a similar post at the beginning of 2022, I noted that others looking at the coming year were cautiously avoiding predictions, given the uncertainties in our world. That uncertainty dominated 2022. Perhaps 2023 will be no different. 

So, for 2023, rather than predictions, I suggest new hopes and reluctant fears for the work of philanthropy, building on what I suggested in early 2022. 

My starting point for these hopes and fears is the belief that philanthropy is an act of relationship. Not just a handover and hand-off but a mutual exchange. Not a choice between trusting or controlling but a productive combining of assets.

I share this belief with Phil Buchanan of the Centre for Effective Philanthropy. Towards the end of 2022, he described his hopes (and some fears) for grantmaking philanthropy in the United States in a long public essay.  This essay summarizes very effectively the questions posed by changes in the philanthropic landscape over the last three years. Buchanan puts his finger on an important question provoked by the calls for less control by funders over their grants. Many of these calls suggest that funders should simply trust their grantees and give with no conditions. This did not consider the need for ongoing and mutual accountability, so necessary to relationship.

Must there be a choice between trust and accountability? No, according to Buchanan. “Thoughtful donors and foundations”, he says, “reject the notion that there need be a dichotomy between strategy, assessment, evidence, and learning on the one hand and trust, listening and flexible support on the other. They recognize that trust develops over time. They embrace mutual accountability. They realize that, while the knowledge and expertise of those closest to issues should be respected, foundation staff and donors do often possess useful knowledge, too.”

The key to this is the assumption that there is value in ongoing relationship between funder and fund receiver. In the Canadian context we too hear calls for more trusting, more flexible, more responsive philanthropy. The overlapping crises of the last three years have lent urgency to these calls. Many funders have responded by providing more general and unconditional support and by relaxing their reporting requirements. These changes should endure. But there is more to do if funders are going  to build more effective relations with a broader range of communities and partners.

In that vein…. I hope in 2023

I fear in 2023

A Wild Guess

Last January 2022 I guessed that the federal government would act to reform the Income Tax Act and guidance restricting the ways in which charities grant to non-charities, in Canada or beyond borders. And the government did indeed move toward change in this area, after enormous advocacy efforts by the charitable sector. My hope for 2023 is that the federal government (through the Canada Revenue Agency) will put out guidance that truly responds to the sector’s needs for clarity and flexibility and that expands accessibility to funding. A wilder guess is that the federal government will agree to have an open dialogue about the wider definition of charitable purpose, with a goal of modernizing our regulations.

Final Note: You will find many more examples of foundations changing their strategies and building more effective relationships in my new book From Charity To Change: Inside the World of Canadian Foundations, out now from McGill Queen’s University Press.

January, as always, is a time for forecasting by philanthropy observers and “opiners”. But during this never-ending pandemic period, as I read and listen to blogs and podcasts about the year ahead, I notice that no-one is being definitive about their forecasts. Uncertainty is greater than ever. People don’t want to make predictions. They would rather express hopes or, more gloomily, voice fears.

I think that hope is a better starting point. This is shared by Phil Buchanan of the Centre for Effective Philanthropy who posted his first 2022 blog with five hopes for philanthropy and nonprofits. Phil points out that there has been more change over the last two years in how US foundation leaders approach their work than in the previous two decades combined. As he says, “for all the suffering and loss it brought — and continues to bring — the pandemic has shown that deep change, even at institutions often derided as insulated and slow to evolve, is possible when it’s necessary.” In my view, this is also true in Canada, in all sectors.

In early January 2021, I wrote about a new agenda for philanthropy and for what I called the “social good sector”. As I reread my words from twelve months ago, I realize that I was voicing my hope that funders and nonprofits would ask and answer challenging questions that might set them on a new path post-pandemic. Questions such as:

These are all questions about doing things differently…and, I hope, better. I acknowledged then that thinking about these questions is tough and answering them through action is even tougher. But I believe that at least some of them are taken seriously, demonstrated by the conversations at various nonprofit conferences and webinars that took place through 2021, and the funding practice changes that have not been rolled back or discarded. These questions are just as important as we head into a new year, with the pandemic still over our heads.

For 2022, I want to put out two hopes, two fears and one wild guess. Perhaps these could be provocations for discussion at board and management tables along with the still important questions that I suggested for 2021.

Hopes

Fears

A Wild Guess

twitter-squarelinkedin-squarearrow-circle-upenvelope-square