Disparities in Funding For African Ngos Report

Disparities in Funding for
African NGOs
Unlocking philanthropy for African NGOs as
a pathway to greater impact
By Mosun Layode, Jan Schwier, Siya Hayi-Charters, Maddie Holland, and Soa Andrian
July 2021
Table of Contents
Preface: A Word on Our Collaboration�� 3
APF’s perspective�� 3
Bridgespan’s perspective�� 4
Coming together in this moment�� 4
Introduction�� 6
Research Overview�� 8
The African NGO Funding Gap�� 11
Situating operating foundations in the African funding ecosystem�� 13
What constitutes an ‘African NGO’?�� 14
A Case for Funding African NGOs�� 18

The importance of proximity for non-African funders�� 18
The right impact vehicle for African funders�� 20
African grantmaking to African NGOs: Spotlight on ACT Foundation
and Project PINK BLUE�� 22
Barriers Standing Between African NGOs and Grants��24

The fifth barrier: Challenging historical biases�� 25
Call to Action: Unlocking Funding for African NGOs��28

Strategies for addressing bias��28
Spotlight: The Kenya Community Development Fund�� 30
Conclusion�� 31
Key research assumptions�� 32
Cover photo: Friendship Bench, a mental health services provider in Zimbabwe, could bring community health
workers to more African countries if it were able to overcome funding disparities from philanthropic sources.
(Photo: Constantine Juta)
2
Preface: A Word on Our Collaboration
The African Philanthropy Forum (APF) and The Bridgespan Group entered into the
collaboration that led to this report in 2020, with the goal to support both African and
international philanthropic donors in identifying ways to increase funding for African
organisations and leaders.
Our organisations came together because of a shared commitment to strengthening

philanthropy as a pathway to creating social impact on the African continent. We also
felt that we bring diverse vantage points to the topic, which would enable us to paint
a holistic picture of the complex funding landscape in which African non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) operate. APF, the leading philanthropic network in Africa, brings
deep knowledge and expertise in regional philanthropy, while Bridgespan brings
knowledge of funders based outside of the continent who are funding organisations
in Africa. Our respective entry points into the conversation are complementary.
APF’s perspective
The African Philanthropy Forum was established in 2014 to build a learning community of
strategic African philanthropists and social investors committed to inclusive and sustainable
development throughout the continent. At APF we support the development of homegrown
philanthropy in Africa in order to transform the culture of giving on the continent. Through
our high-impact convenings and initiatives, we have facilitated collaborations, amplified the
work of changemakers and shared best philanthropic practices and strategies for promoting
homegrown development, reaching over 2,500 philanthropists, social investors, and key
stakeholders in the philanthropic space across Africa and the world. One of the strategic
opportunities we have been focused on recently is unlocking more money from African
philanthropists, in support of African NGOs. Charitable giving has a long history on the
African continent, and large-scale, institutional philanthropy has increasingly emerged
over the past 30 years.
With a footprint in 14 countries on the continent, APF has a unique appreciation for the
impact that African philanthropists create, and a deep understanding of the barriers
they face as they seek to support local NGOs. In addition, given our role in providing
philanthropists with access to information that informs giving, APF recognises the urgent
need to close the funding gap in the social sector and reduce the reliance of local NGOs
on international funding. By asking the right questions to eliminate the bottlenecks that
restrict local funding, APF seeks to serve as a conduit that will direct funds to where they
are most needed, ultimately driving long-term sustainable impact in Africa.
3
Bridgespan’s perspective
Headquartered in the United States, Bridgespan opened its first office on the African
continent in 2019, in Johannesburg, South Africa. We believe strongly in the principles
laid out in this report—prioritising proximity, equity, and African-led development—but
we explicitly acknowledge that we at Bridgespan are on our own journey to fully live
into those values in our team and our work. At the time of publishing this report, we
are still in the process of building a Bridgespan team in Johannesburg that is more fully
representative of the region in which we work. We also recognise that in our advisory work
more broadly, we may have played a role in perpetuating some of the challenges that we
outline in this report, such as by promoting philanthropic practices that had exclusionary
consequences for proximate organisations in Africa. We are committed to continuing to
learn from practitioners in Africa on these themes, and to unlearn our past mistakes.
At the same time, given our unique platform and position in the sector, we feel a
responsibility to add to the movement and call for locally led development in Africa,
with the goal of helping to shape inclusive philanthropic practices and unlock more
funding for African organisations. We enter this conversation with great respect for and
acknowledgment of the African leaders—whether in NGOs, philanthropy, or otherwise—
who have been guiding the way on this debate for much longer than we have. Several
global funders have also played a leading role in championing proximity in funding, and
they live into these principles in their work every day. Together with APF, our goal is to
amplify the work and leadership of many of these organisations, and contribute to the
conversation as best we can.
Coming together in this moment

To be sure, the conversation around the need to fund local African NGOs is not new.
However, this disparity has risen to the social sector’s collective conscience over the past
several years, as institutions holding power and resources globally are increasingly aware
of a need for change.
In Africa, there is continued growth in wealth accumulation and in private philanthropic

giving. This creates more opportunities for regional philanthropists to fund nonprofit
organisations, and a greater need for a strong ecosystem to make it easier for nonprofits
to tap into regional funding flows.
The moment was heightened by an increased focus on racial justice globally, particularly
in 2020. The Black Lives Matter movement accelerated across the world, with protests in
the US intersecting with movements in Africa, such as EndSARS in Nigeria. Calls for racial
justice are contributing to a reckoning in the international philanthropy space, pointing
towards more locally led solutions. At this critical juncture, the founder of Nairobi-based
NGO SHOFCO, Kennedy Odede, wrote that it is critical that ‘the legacy of racial injustice
extends far beyond those borders and any honest reckoning must include open dialogue
around race in international development’.
4
Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted not only the extreme inequities that exist across
and within countries, but also the critically important role that community-based organisations
play. Numerous interviewees throughout our research pointed to 2020 as a powerful
example of the need to fund locally led organisations on the continent, given the leading
role they played (and continue to play) in supporting communities through the crisis.
While many African organisations are already delivering transformative impact on the
continent, historical barriers to funding have held these organisations back from reaching
full potential. Through our work together, APF and Bridgespan have sought to surface
the challenges underlying these barriers, and potential solutions that exist to unlock more
funding. By funding proximate, African organisations, we believe that philanthropic donors
within and outside Africa can be an engine that further propels the leadership, creativity
and impact potential that already exist in communities across the continent.
Mosun Layode Jan Schwier

African Philanthropy Forum The Bridgespan Group
5
Introduction
For more than 15 years, Friendship Bench, a mental health services
provider, has been researching potential solutions to the mental
health treatment void in Zimbabwe, where just 18 practicing
psychiatrists and six clinical psychologists1 service the mental
health needs of the country’s 14.6 million people. Facing that
yawning gap, the organisation came up with a model—training
lay community health workers, affectionately referred to as
‘grandmothers’, to deliver quality mental health services—that
proved to be a success. Friendship Bench’s interventions have
resulted in an 80 percent reduction in depression and suicide
ideation, and a 60 percent improvement in quality of life for
its clients.2
Friendship Bench’s success was fuelled in part by funding it received at two critical
junctures. Yet, for all the impact it has demonstrated, the organisation still faces challenges
in accessing the type of funding that would enable it to grow. It’s a familiar story for many
African non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
Friendship Bench’s story began in 2006, when Zimbabwean psychiatrist Dr Dixon Chibanda

came to realise that a patient of his tragically took her own life because she did not have
the bus fare to travel to Harare for her appointment. He resolved then that he could not
rely on the community to come to him for care; he had to bring mental healthcare to the
community. So he started Friendship Bench to bring quality, effective, and affordable
mental healthcare to communities across Zimbabwe. In the early days, Friendship Bench
was housed in the department of community medicine of the University of Zimbabwe.
Dixon initially self-funded Friendship Bench using his salary, supplemented by a $2,000
research grant from a local NGO.
Its first big breakthrough came when it published the results of a randomised control trial
impact assessment in the Journal of the American Medical Association, a trial funded by
Grand Challenges Canada. The results gave Friendship Bench international publicity and
led to Dixon joining the ASPEN New Voices Fellowship, a move which enabled Friendship
Bench to access new social networks and increase its visibility. Through these platforms,
Friendship Bench was able to secure further research grants and scale its activities.
1 World Health Organisation Special Initiative for Mental Health, ‘Situational Assessment’, Zimbabwe, 2020.
2 Dixon Chibanda, MD, Helen A. Weiss, DPhil, Ruth Verhey, MSc, et al, ‘Effect of a Primary Care–Based Psychological
Intervention on Symptoms of Common Mental Disorders in Zimbabwe: A Randomised Clinical Trial’, JAMA
Network, December 27, 2016.
6
From 2018, Friendship Bench began to move away from being largely a university-based,
research-focused entity to a stand-alone NGO focused on expanding its impact. Again,
funding was a catalyst; Dixon became a Mulago Fellow, an opportunity that came with
a $100,000 grant and extensive advice on scaling. It is through Mulago Foundation that
Friendship Bench was connected to Draper Richards Kaplan (DRK) Foundation from which
it received its most substantial grant. In 2020, DRK Foundation gave Friendship Bench a
$300,000 multiyear, unrestricted grant, coupled with organisational support. Friendship
Bench credits DRK Foundation with assisting it to structure and strengthen its board, set
up a coherent human resources function, and improve fundraising and communications
capabilities. Friendship Bench now supports over 700 trained grandmothers, who have
served 65,000 clients in five countries—quite an achievement from its initial cohort of
14 grandmothers in one Zimbabwean city.
Still, Friendship Bench’s fundraising challenges continue. Most of the grants the organisation
has received to-date have been restricted, resulting in Friendship Bench not being able to
make core organisational investments, such as building its team and paying competitive
salaries. In addition, despite an evidence-based approach and the dire need for mental
healthcare interventions in Africa, Friendship Bench has struggled to attract the large
grants—more than $1 million—that would enable it to expand its impact substantially.
And make no mistake that it has broad ambitions: by 2025, Dixon and his team aim to
have trained 15,000 grandmothers, reaching five million clients across 10 countries. But
the funding hasn’t been there.
A key driver has been a lack of trust from donors. As observed by Dixon, ’We live in a
world where there is a skewed perception of what African organisations are capable of
achieving. The effort that we have to put in to get funding is so much more in comparison
to organisations based in the US and UK, even where they have much less evidence.’ For
Friendship Bench, this dynamic is exacerbated by its location in Zimbabwe, a country
where many NGOs have struggled to raise philanthropic capital due to a challenging
political situation, which can create perceptions of high risk amongst donors.
Friendship Bench’s story is not unique. Rather, it is one of innumerable examples of

organisations doing incredible work on the continent—yet struggling to access the
funding needed to propel their impact further. While African NGOs are deeply rooted
in communities, they face a web of systemic issues that often confines organisations to
small, restricted, short-term grants. This dynamic impedes their ability to build strong
organisations and unlock more capital, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of underfunding.
Breaking this cycle is a substantive opportunity for donors, foundations, and philanthropic
programmes operating on the continent. With that in mind, the authors set out to better
understand the challenges African NGOs face when raising funds, and the steps funders
can take to overcome them, which are summarised in ‘Call to Action: Unlocking Funding
for African NGOs’, beginning on page 28.
7
Research Overview
This research is a partnership between the African Philanthropy Forum (APF) and The
Bridgespan Group to provide data and essential insights for the many donors in Africa
and around the world looking to make a difference on the African continent. Bridgespan
was prompted to examine the paucity of funding going to African NGOs in part because
of research conducted by its Johannesburg office in 2020 and 2021 on large-scale African
philanthropy.3 One of the stand-out findings of the 2020 report was that African NGOs
received a relatively modest share of large gifts between 2010 and 2019: 14 percent
of grants (by value) from non-African donors and just 9 percent from African donors4
(with large gifts defined as $10 million for non-African funders and $1 million for African
funders). Bridgespan updated the research in 2021 to highlight a massive response by
African philanthropists to the COVID-19 pandemic: the number of gifts in 2020 was seven
times the annual average for the previous decade. Yet African organisations still only
received 9 percent of grants (by value) from African donors.5
To be sure, the funding disparity faced by African NGOs is not a new dynamic. African
leaders such as Degan Ali, CEO at Adeso6 and Stephanie Kimou, founder of Population
Works Africa7 have been calling for ‘localisation’ in the aid sector for decades. It is also
central to the work of many re-granting organisations on the continent, which have been
granting to local African organisations for many years—including the African Women’s
Development Fund, Kenya Community Development Fund, and TrustAfrica, to name a few.
To add to this discourse, we conducted interviews with more than 60 stakeholders

and conducted a survey with 50 respondents. Our interviewees and survey respondents
included African and non-African funders, African NGO leaders, Africa-focused international
NGO (INGO) leaders, researchers, and intermediaries. Our aim was to build a better
understanding of the nuances within the African philanthropic ecosystem and of the
barriers African NGOs face as they seek funding from both African and non-African
funders. We also hoped to find and share workable solutions, both from an NGO
perspective and from the vantage point of donors, be they from Africa or abroad.
In addition, we drew on existing reports such as the Global Humanitarian Assistance Report
2019;8 The State of Global Giving by US Foundations;9 Echoing Green’s The State of Social
3 J. Schwier, C. Wallington, M. Holland and W. Magoronga, The Landscape of Large-Scale Giving by African
Philanthropists: A Research Brief, The Bridgespan Group, June 15, 2020.
4 Bridgespan analysis, based on sample of 64 gifts made by African donors to causes/organisations in Africa;
all gifts made between the years 2010–2019. Data reflects share defined in terms of total value of gifts.
5 S. Hayi-Charters, M. Holland, S. Andrian, and J. Schwier, ‘The Landscape of Large-Scale Giving by African
Philanthropists in 2020’, The Bridgespan Group, February 18, 2021.
6 New York Times editorial board, ‘Opinion: Foreign Aid Is Having a Reckoning’, The New York Times,
February 13, 2021.
7 A. Baguios, ‘How to be Anti-Racist in Aid: A Conversation About Racism in the Aid Sector’, YouTube, June 17,
2020.
8 The Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2019, Development Initiatives, September 30, 2019.
9 Foundation Center and The Council on Foundations, The State of Global Giving by US Foundations: 2011-2015,
2018.
8
Entrepreneurship, 2019 and 2020 editions;10 the African Venture Philanthropy Alliance’s
Landscape for Social Investments in Africa 2020;11 and Harvard’s Global Philanthropy Report.12
We also reviewed ‘A Different Kind of Wealth’ published in 2021 by the Global Fund for
Community Foundations,13 and Coordination SUD’s 2020 research study, ‘Localisation of
Aid’.14 These insights highlighted the extent to which the modest funding reaching African
NGOs intersects with many other research areas, including localisation and decolonisation
in development, racial equity and justice in philanthropy, and ‘peer-driven change’.15 Our
goal is to add more data and information to the longstanding conversation about the
power of funding Africa’s NGOs and supporting local solutions.
In embarking on this research, we were also mindful of the fact that Africa is big and far
from homogenous. In 2013, German designer Kai Krause created an infographic depicting
the true size of Africa.16 He produced a geographical jigsaw in which 18 countries ‘fit’ into
a cut-out of the continent, including the United States, China, India, and Germany. The
continent is home to 54 unique and diverse countries at vastly different stages of economic,
social, and political development. Our interviews aimed to reflect some, but certainly not all,
of the diversity present within our primary region of focus, sub-Saharan Africa.
10 Echoing Green, State of Social Entrepreneurship 2019, April 10, 2019; Echoing Green, State of Social
Entrepreneurship 2020, March 30, 2020.
11 African Venture Philanthropy Alliance, The Landscape for Social Investment in Africa, November 11, 2020.
12 P.D. Johnson, Global Philanthropy Report: Perspectives on the Global Foundation Sector, Harvard Kennedy
School, 2018.
13 J. Hodgson and B. Knight, A different kind of wealth: Mapping a baseline of African community foundations,
Global Fund for Community Foundations, October 2012.
14 M. Vielajus and J.M. Charancle, Localisation of Aid: Lessons From Partnerships Between French NGOs and
Local Actors, Coordination SUD, ONGLAB, March 2020.
15 Rohit Menezes, Simon Morfit, and Willa Seldon, ‘Why “Peer-Driven” Change—and Why Now?’ The Bridgespan
Group, July 22, 2020.
16 K. Krause, The True Size of Africa. A small contribution in the fight against rampant Immappancy, October 15,
2011.
9
Figure 1. The funding landscape for African NGOs is diverse
African funders Non-African funders

Headquartered in Africa Headquartered outside Africa
Predominant funding vehicles: Predominant funding vehicles:

• Operating foundations (direct • Grantmaking foundations (including
implementation over grantmaking) private foundations, donor collaboratives,
• Grantmaking foundations (including and high-net-worth-individual giving)
private foundations and high-net-
worth-individual giving)
Methodological nuances to note: Methodological nuances to note:

• Includes corporate giving, through • Excludes corporate giving*
corporate social investment, corporate • Includes diaspora giving
social responsibility, and corporate
• Includes foundations that are
foundations, as it features prominently
headquartered outside of Africa but
on the continent
with regional offices on the continent,
• Corporate giving can take the form often led by African nationals
of both grantmaking and direct
implementation approaches
Funding disparity Funding disparity
9%
8% 14%
16% 1%
20%
64
number of 33%
202
number of
grants, 2010-19 grants, 2010-19
41%
58%
Large gifts from African funders Large gifts from

mostly flow to public sector entities non-African funders mostly
and operating foundations flow to international NGOs
Local organisation
International organisation Local organisation
Operating foundation International organisation
Public sector Public sector
Other Other
*Excluded corporate giving to be consistent with the methodology used in The Bridgespan Group’s ‘big
bets’ research in the United States. However, this type of giving is included in the case of African funders
due to the significant role it plays in directing funds towards social change in Africa. ‘Local organisation’
refers to organisations that are headquartered in a country in Africa, including local NGOs and local
academic institutions. ‘International organisation’ refers to organisations headquartered outside the
continent, including INGOs, academic institutions and multilateral institutions.
Source: The Bridgespan Group
10
The African NGO Funding Gap
The landscape of funding flows in Africa is multifaceted and complex, with funding originating
from different geographies, to a variety of countries within Africa, and implemented through
a range of vehicles. In conducting this research, we found that the differentiation between
African and non-African funders is important, because the reasons for the funding disparity
experienced by African NGOs vary between the two groups. (See Figure 1 on the previous
page.) Therefore, throughout this report, we highlight differences in approaches between
these funder groups, bearing in mind that sometimes issues overlap.
This report also takes a broader view on grant size (specifically to include smaller grant
sizes) than the large gifts focus in Bridgespan’s 2020 and 2021 reports. The social-sector
leaders whom we surveyed for this report also agreed that African NGOs receive a modest
share of philanthropic funding flows. (See Figure 2.) And our interviews confirmed that
disparities permeate smaller grant levels.
Figure 2. How much of a problem is the funding disparity?

Our survey respondents agree that …however, there is division on the degree
there is a funding gap for local NGOs… to which the disparity is problematic
n=49 n=44
100% 2% 5%
4%
6% 5%
80% 18%
Strongly disagree — 43%
converse observed
60%
Somewhat disagree —
have not observed this Not a pattern observed
40% Neither agree Have observed, but do not
69% nor disagree believe to be a problem
Agree — not a stark 48% Not amongst the most pressing
20% disparity problems of sector
Strongly agree — One of the most pressing
stark disparity problems in sector
0%
Does a funding disparity Is this funding disparity
exist for African NGOs? a significant problem?
Source: Bridgespan Group and African Philanthropy Forum survey on funding disparities facing African
NGOs (2020-2021)
Additionally, our observation on funding disparities faced by African organisations is

corroborated by secondary research, not only within philanthropy but also in the aid sector.
Numerous other studies also point to the dynamic of a majority of funding reaching
international organisations (See Figure 3 on the next page.)
11
Figure 3. The funding gap from other perspectives
Total value of US foundation

$9.0B funding in sub-Saharan Africa
from 2011–2015
5.9%of this money went to

local organisations
Total amount spent by the US, Total international

$1.1B UK, and Canada on malaria $21.2B humanitarian assistance
development aid in 2017 in 2017
1.0%of this money is estimated

0.4% of this international aid was
to have gone to in-country received by local and national
research institutions NGOs directly
Sources: ($9.0B) Foundation Center and The Council on Foundations, The State of Global Giving by US
Foundations: 2011–2015, 2018; ($1.1B) The Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2019, Development Initiatives,
September 30, 2019; ($21.2B) N.A. Erondu, I. Aniebo, C. Kyobutungi, J. Midega, E. Okiro and F. Okumu, ‘Open letter
to international funders of science and development in Africa’, Nature Medicine 27, no. 5 (May 2021):742–744.
Similarly, Bridgespan’s research shows that African NGOs compete not only with other
NGOs, but also with operating foundations and public sector entities. Between 2010 and
2019,17 African donors directed 33 percent of their large-scale gifts towards their own
operating foundations, with just 9 percent going to local NGOs. (See ‘Situating operating
foundations in the African funding ecosystem’ on the next page.)
17 Bridgespan analysis, based on sample of 64 gifts made by African donors to causes/organisations in Africa;
all gifts made between the years 2010 and 2019.
12
Situating operating foundations in the African funding ecosystem
Operating foundations are directly involved in determining and running their own
philanthropic activities and projects, rather than making direct grants to other
organisations. This particular brand of private philanthropic organisation is not
unique to Africa and is common across South Asia, Southeast Asia,18 Latin America,19
and Europe.20 Operating foundations are, however, less evident in the United States.
In sub-Saharan Africa, there are many operating foundations engaging in powerful
work, including the Tony Elumelu Foundation, Allan Gray Orbis Foundation, Mo Ibrahim
Foundation, and the Zenex Foundation.
Our research revealed different motivations for following this route. For instance, if
a donor can’t find a local NGO operating in the region or the field, then they might
bring in-house the appropriate skills and ‘move into operating’, explains independent
consultant Shelagh Gastrow. The proximity of the donor to the community it serves
is also a motivating factor. As observed by Nigerian philanthropist and Professor
Fabian Ajogwu, SAN, ‘Some [African] givers want to have an operating foundation
out of the attitude that “I know the terrain. I know the needs of my people. I see
them.” There’s knowledge of the [community’s] needs and environment.’
Sometimes the need to exercise greater control and oversight comes into play,
causing donors to favour an approach that allows them to keep an eye on how
their resources are used. This is not always due to a lack of faith in African NGOs,
but rather a belief in the abilities and business backgrounds of the wealthy funders
behind the operating foundation. As Dr Bhekinkosi Moyo, director of the Centre on
African Philanthropy and Social Investment (CAPSI) said: African high-net-worth
individuals (HNWIs) ‘prefer doing it themselves through their foundations and that’s
partly because there’s a perception, in my view, that HNWIs are efficient.’
Another consideration we heard was the ability to use the assets and capabilities
of an organisation to create scale. We were given the example of a pan-African bank
with operations in 36 African countries whose scale and geographic footprint aided
its operating foundation’s ability to make social impact across a continent where
giving tends to be localised. Using the bank’s existing employees is also a way to
leverage existing teams rather than setting up an entirely separate foundation.
18 R.A. Shapiro, ‘Philanthropists in Asia: What Do They Want? What Do They Get?’ Pragmatic Philanthropy:
Asian Charity Explained, Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018, 85-100.
19 H. Monteiro, M. Kisil, and M.A. Woods, Private social investment trends in Latin America, Institute for the
Development of Social Investments and Charities Aid Foundation, Sao Paulo, 2011.
20 O.B. Breen, Enlarging the Space for European Philanthropy, UCD Sutherland School of Law, Dublin, January 16,
2018.
13
Faced with these limited funding flows from African funders, many African NGOs have been
forced to concentrate their fundraising efforts on international funders. Yet the research shows
that there is a long history of international organisations receiving support from outside the
continent over African ones. This distinct preference for funding INGOs has implications
beyond statistics and funding flows. It feeds into a negative self-reinforcing mechanism that
African NGOs are somehow less capable, less trustworthy, and less accountable than their
international counterparts. This, in turn, keeps funding levels low and reduces the potential for
these organisations to build the capabilities and skills needed to expand their impact.
African NGOs find themselves between an unyielding rock and a hard place: fighting it out
on the world stage with larger INGOs for a slice of the foreign funding pie, while battling
to become the preferred impact vehicle of African philanthropists.
What constitutes an ‘African NGO’?

One of the key questions we grappled with was understanding what constitutes an
African NGO, especially in the context of the continent’s diverse NGO landscape. We
turned to leaders in the sector to help us define the parameters required to qualify
as African. Along the way, we refined our own terminology towards ‘African NGOs’,
rather than ‘local NGOs’, to avoid confusion of the term ‘local’ with grassroots only,
community-based organisations.
There are many ways to define ‘African NGO’, as we learned through our interviews
with funders and NGO leaders who look at a variety of characteristics. While there
wasn’t a single definition, the existence of an Africa-based decision-making ‘locus
of power’ was a common consideration. Characteristics that indicated the locus
of power include the headquarters location, the composition of an organisation’s
leadership team and board of directors, decision-making structures and norms, and
the focus of the work on the ground. (See Figure 4 on the next page.)
Headquarters location was a helpful place to start, because headquarters can

be a good proxy for where some share of decision-making power resides. We
ultimately selected headquarters location as our measure, because our previous
research indicated funding disparities for Africa-headquartered organisations. By
this definition, INGOs (which are not the focus of this research) are not considered
to be African NGOs. We acknowledge, however, that many INGOs working on
the continent are in the process of localising, such as by hiring African leaders
and empowering them with real decision-making agency, as well as registering
in-country. As observed by MacArthur Foundation’s Nigeria Office Director Kole
Shettima: ‘I have been on the boards of Action Aid and PLAN International and
while both are locally registered, we were always struggling to be considered local
organisations. Although these organisations may be part of an international network,
how they are viewed must also be determined by what happens at the local level.’
Given complexities like this, it became clear that headquarters location was not a
sufficient indication of locus of power. To supplement this point, our interviewees
pointed us to additional parameters to consider.
14
Figure 4. While there is no singular definition of ‘African NGO’,
interviewees offered important parameters, centring on where
decision making sits
Questions to consider Questions to consider
• What is the identity of • What is the level of
the founder? African representation
• What is the identity of on the board?
the leader? • Where is the board
Leadership Board and
• What is the level of based?
team governance
African representation • Do local boards have true
on the leadership team? decision-making power?
Questions Questions
to consider Operating to consider
Decision-making model and
• Is the Headquarters • To what extent
‘locus of power’ decision-
location
headquarters making are practices
located in an structures and processes
African country? shaped by the
local context and
Questions to consider culture?
Community • What decision-
• Does the organisation seek making authority
engagement
community input on its initiatives? is given to teams
• To what extent does the organisation in Africa?
work in partnership with
communities?
Some interviewees said it was an important consideration if the founder of an

organisation was proximate to the challenges being addressed. Some expected the
founder and the majority of the leadership team to be African nationals, ideally from
the country of operation. Kenya-based consultant Anne Mbaabu was amongst this
number, saying: ‘I think when we say an African organisation we mean, one it is based
in Africa. Secondly, the leadership is African—at least the top leadership.’
Leadership and the nationality of team members were common themes. However,
some interviewees regard lived experience as being of greater importance than the
nationality of the individual team members. ‘You need lived experience in the context
in which you are working. I will never say it’s only about being Black or white—it does
not matter where you’re from if you’ve spent 20 years living in a community and you
completely understand the local context’, said Kanini Mutooni, managing director of
the DRK Foundation.
This debate continued to the pinnacle of leadership structures, at the board and
governance level. The presence of a board in-country or a global board comprising
African nationals—or both—was seen by many as a key indication of proximity in
decision making. Theo Sowa, the former CEO of the African Women’s Development
Fund, had a firm view on the subject: ‘I think you have to look at where key decisions
are made and who is making them. If you are part of a federated board, and the
15
board is sitting in New York, for example, then I think that you might have to question
whether you can call yourself an African organisation. Even if you’re headquartered
on the continent, if those kinds of overarching governance decisions are made from
outside of the continent, then I don’t believe that you are truly an African organisation.’
Some felt that having non-African members on the leadership team and board has its
advantages, adding to diversity of perspectives and insights, and growing networks
and funding opportunities in high-income economies. ‘Some people feel strongly
that an entity serving Africans should be 100 percent African. I take a different view:
I think diversity is key. We are in a global village. It’s important and healthy to have,
including on governance entities, others who are not Africans. Just as boards in high-
income economies serving disadvantaged communities should include members
of the communities they serve. We all bring unique perspectives, lived experience,
networks, as well as access to resources to the table. Ultimately, it’s about respect,
partnership, and common values’, commented Angie Murimirwa, executive director of
Africa for CAMFED (the Campaign for Female Education).
Still, our interviewees noted that when non-Africans were included on teams, it
was critically important for African staff members to have real agency, pointing
interviewees to look at the operating model and decision-making structures within
organisations. Interviewees raised challenges of tokenism within NGO leadership,
whereby African team members are not trusted with real power and authority. We
also heard several examples of this at a board level; an organisation may have an
in‑country board, for example, without granting it significant decision-making power.
Having African and non-African team or board members requires careful attention to
avoid these dynamics.
Finally, the level of community engagement was named as an important component.

A number of our interviewees focused on the degree to which organisations engage
with communities in their work to define a ‘local’ African NGO. For example, Linda
Ochiel, Ford Foundation’s Nairobi-based programme officer, noted: ‘Proximity
is relative, really. So local organisations or proximate leaders would be from the
communities they work with. As a regional program officer, when looking at a
“local” organisation, I mean community-based organisations.’
Many of these characteristics resonated with our survey respondents who were
asked to rank important factors they consider when defining whether an organisation
is local. (See Figure 5 on the next page.)
16
Figure 5. Survey results: What organisational characteristics are
most important to identify an African organisation?
Composite ranking of select
factors in defining ‘African NGOs’
‘Where the company ‘The organisation serves

was founded and if 1 Where the organisation or implements its activities
is headquartered
headquarters are still within the country it is
there.’ founded and located in.’
2 Nationality of leader
‘Best described as leaders
‘Majority of staff is residing or coming from
African.’ communities they seek to
serve. Ideally, these local
3 L
ived experience/socio organisations will also be
economic proximity of leader based in local communities
and employ local residents
‘Composition of majority
as a means to enable
of staff—local vs expat.’
4 Composition of broader them to take ownership
leadership team and/or of their problems.’
board
‘Has substantive
feedback mechanisms to ‘If it is a broader, multi-
ensure that the voices of 5 Racial identity of leader country and multi-region
the community it seeks network, then what are
to serve are substantially the relative decision-
and frequently informing making roles of the team
the design of the in the given African
programming.’ 6 Other country or region?’
Source: Bridgespan Group and African Philanthropy Forum survey on funding disparities facing
African NGOs (2020-2021)
17
A Case for Funding African NGOs
With the funding gap experienced by many African NGOs clear, our next task was to
uncover why it is critical for funders to support proximate organisations in Africa.
To be sure, some interviewees did highlight the inequity embedded in the premise of
this question, noting that the same is not typically asked of international organisations
working on the continent. However, we also heard that outlining the actionable, practical
ways in which proximate NGOs are differentially able to create impact was important for
influencing funder behaviour. As Cher-Wen DeWitt from the Segal Family Foundation said:
‘I don’t know why we need to prove the impact case for funding local organisations when
it is simply a question of ethics. At the same time, there is great, often undocumented
evidence on the importance of doing this to create durable change in communities.’
Our conversations with interviewees have helped us to gather a multitude of reasons as to

why funding African NGOs is imperative for funders seeking to drive social impact on the
continent. As Jacob Lief, CEO and co-founder of South African NGO Ubuntu Pathways,
noted: ‘Every community is different. I’ve seen too many one-size-fits-all solutions. Local
knowledge is essential. Being fluent in how a community works and understanding its
dynamics is essential to having an impact. I would encourage funders to look at groups
who are truly rooted in communities.’
The importance of proximity for non-African funders

‘Proximity’ is the primary lens through which non-African funders viewed this issue. Proximity
can be interpreted and understood in different ways, of course; we use it to describe leaders
who, through their lived experience, are closest to the problems they seek to address.
How does proximity to communities strengthen the case for African NGOs? First and
foremost, it imbues and empowers these organisations with particular assets that enable
them to deliver differential impact. Consider, for a moment, the importance of the following:
• Context. It’s almost impossible to grasp the reality of living in Africa and the needs of a
community from the top of a high-rise building in New York or London. For African NGOs,
the needs of the community are their shared reality; they are more likely to understand
the context because they are living it. In Friendship Bench’s case, founder Dixon Chibanda’s
knowledge of, and experience in, the community informed how the African NGO was
so effective at tackling mental health challenges in Zimbabwe. Chibanda recognised
the social standing grandmothers enjoyed in hard-to-reach communities, as well as their
commitment to helping those in their communities. He turned those social and human
elements into much-needed sustainable mental health services.
• Credibility. African NGOs and leaders have the trust of the community and the credibility
to carry out work, said Professor Amos Njuguna, dean of the School of Graduate Studies
at the United States International University-Africa in Kenya and founder of the Network
for Impact Evaluation Researchers in Africa (NIERA). ‘In terms of getting trust, especially
with the policymakers and political actors, locals do much, much better’, he said. ‘I’ve
heard … people saying, “Oh yeah. We want to work with you guys because anytime
I have a problem, I just drive across the road. I come and get you. But when I have
18
someone who is based away from Kenya, I feel like this person is a bit far away and
does not understand my sentiments.”’
• Sustainability. African NGOs are committed to their communities and driving sustained
impact over time. Jennifer Lentfer, creator of the blog How-matters.org, which focuses
on international aid and philanthropy, observed: ‘When organisations are not externally
catalysed or are led entirely by people from the same communities they serve, they
will more likely remain in those communities, working on these issues, long after
international actors have left.’21
• Building an ecosystem. Investing in African
NGOs enables funders to invest in talent and
support a sector that will have staying power
over a longer time horizon. As the founder of
‘ LEAP Africa’s staff alumni
are leading dynamic social
LEAP Africa, and APF board member Ndidi
enterprises and nonprofit
Nwuneli observed: ‘LEAP Africa’s staff alumni organisations across Nigeria.
are leading dynamic social enterprises and By funding organisations like
nonprofit organisations across Nigeria. By LEAP Africa ... we are building
funding organisations like LEAP Africa and capacity that’s long term.
the many terrific nonprofits in our ecosystem, I compare that to an INGO
we are building capacity that’s long term.
that comes in, implements
I compare that to an INGO that comes in,
implements a project, and when the funding
a project, and when the
ends, packs up. I see that their leadership teams funding ends, packs up. ...
come in with the project and then return to the There’s no long-term impact,
home country after the project ends. There’s no no sustainability beyond the
long-term impact, no sustainability beyond the life of the project.’
life of the project. These forms of investments
NDIDI NWUNELI, FOUNDER, LEAP AFRICA AND
do not create a viable sector, nor leaders and BOARD MEMBER, APF
champions to drive transformation in the
medium-long term.’
The response to COVID-19 on the continent is a case in point. Many of our interviewees
pointed to the leading role that African NGOs played. Sharmi Surianarain, chief impact
officer at the Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator, noted: ‘So many grassroots
organisations [were] able to actually achieve much more than what we’d originally given
them credit for, primarily because they had community and grassroots relationships.’
Some international funders recognise the opportunity. For example, the Mastercard
Foundation’s current strategy, Young Africa Works, is focused on enabling access to
dignified and fulfilling work for 30 million young people in Africa, particularly young
women, and the foundation is intentionally prioritising partnerships with African
organisations to execute its strategy. To quote Peter Materu, chief program officer at
Mastercard Foundation, ‘Economic development initiatives on the continent can only
be sustained if they are ultimately owned and driven by African organisations. So, part
of the focus must be on enabling these organisations to become globally competitive,
self-perpetuating engines of growth and progress.’
21 Jennifer Lentfer, ‘Five reasons funding should go directly to local NGOs’, The Guardian, November 13, 2015.
19
The right impact vehicle for African funders
The case for funding African NGOs takes on a different hue for African philanthropists,
who are already more proximate to the need, especially since the majority of large gifts
stay within the donor’s home country (81 percent of large gifts made by African donors in
Bridgespan’s research were domestic). But it does then beg the question of why African
donors favour operating foundations and public sector funding over supporting
African NGOs.
There were mixed views on the role and prevalence of operating foundations. Some felt
that by leveraging their assets and skills, operating foundations are able to fill gaps in the
African NGO ecosystem to the betterment of communities. Karen Gabriels, head of finance
and operations at the Allan Gray Orbis Foundation, commented: ‘When the foundation
was formed, there were no NGOs doing work in entrepreneurship mindset development.
We, therefore, filled a gap that existed at the time.’
Others expressed scepticism or concern about the presence of operating foundations.

Some of our interviewees highlighted concerns around emerging power imbalances
between operating foundations, given their influence, and African NGOs.
Yet there’s also a counterargument that holds if impact is the primary motivator, then
funders can be agnostic about the vehicle. Fred Swaniker, founder of the African Leadership
Group, explained: ‘For me, the end goal is impact; if you set up an operating foundation, and
it’s high impact, go ahead and do it.’
Undoubtedly, there is amazing work underway by philanthropists on the continent who

fund through their operating foundations. Yet we at APF and Bridgespan believe that just
9 percent of large gifts reaching African NGOs is low. Indeed, 69 percent of our social
sector survey respondents strongly agreed, calling the gap a stark disparity.
‘
Furthermore, African civil society and social
movements play a distinct role in the African The case has always been that
ecosystem. Luam Kidane, Thousand Currents’ social movements are the ones
regional director for Africa, told us: ‘The case that push for change, because
has always been that social movements are the power will not concede unless
ones that push for change, because power will it’s met with power. ... Where
not concede unless it’s met with power. In every
large-scale progressive social
situation that you can think of where large-
scale progressive social transformation has
transformation has occurred,
occurred, it’s been because groups of people, it’s been because groups of
movements, have come together to struggle people, movements, have
for transformative change and build power come together to struggle for
from below.’ transformative change and build
Aga Khan University Vice Provost Alex O. Awiti power from below.’
has also observed that civil society actors LUAM KIDANE, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, AFRICA,
have played a key role in the emergence of THOUSAND CURRENTS
fundamental freedoms on the continent,
20
especially the expansion of democracy in postcolonial Africa.22 A capable and independent
local civil society sector is still required on the continent to continue acting as a
counterbalance to keep governments effective and accountable. NGOs on the continent
have also played an important role in filling critical gaps in service delivery and disaster
response. For example, Friendship Bench is helping to fill a mental health treatment gap
in Zimbabwe. The organisation has leveraged existing government infrastructure to offer
these services alongside services already prioritised by the government.
Therefore, in parallel with conversations

related to proximity and equity amongst
international donors, African philanthropists
might also consider how African NGOs are
‘
My questions are not about the
gap in funding “local organisations”
best placed to deliver impact due to their but rather, how do we harness
unique positioning within communities. African philanthropy to support
We also believe this is critical for enabling grassroots organisations and
African-led solutions, further empowering movements, to support structural
Africa to shape its own developmental issues of inequality? ... We need
agenda, while ensuring a more balanced
to do research that harnesses that
funding landscape for African NGOs, one
without a disproportionate reliance on
power rather than continues to look
foreign funding. Nancy Moloantoa from the to the Global North for answers.’
Open Society Foundations and formerly of NANCY MOLOANTOA, PORTFOLIO LEAD, SOCIO-
the Ford Foundation noted: ‘My questions ECONOMIC RIGHTS, OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS
are not about the gap in funding “local

organisations” but rather, how do we
harness African philanthropy to support grassroots organisations and movements, to
support structural issues of inequality? I do not think that Africa wants to continue to
depend on foreign funding and we need to do research that harnesses that power rather
than continues to look to the Global North for answers.’
While we recognise the incredible work being done by INGOs, operating foundations, and
public sector entities in Africa, the experiences of African NGOs such as Friendship Bench and
Project PINK BLUE (see ‘African grantmaking to African NGOs: Spotlight on ACT Foundation
and Project PINK BLUE’) make clear that insufficient funding is flowing to African NGOs.
To help address this disparity, funders can carefully analyse their portfolios when making
future funding decisions, being mindful of African NGOs and ensuring that these crucial
players in the African social sector are not left behind. Encouragingly, our survey indicates
that funders are aware of this challenge and looking to improve. Eighty-six percent of our
survey respondents agreed that funders want to increase support for NGOs they see as local.
However, many of our interviewees noted that funders face challenges fulfilling this desire.
22 Alex O. Awiti, ‘Time to Re-Imagine the Role of Civil Society in Africa’, International Policy Digest, July 26, 2016.
21
African grantmaking to African NGOs: Spotlight on ACT Foundation
and Project PINK BLUE
Nigeria’s Aspire Coronation Trust (ACT) Foundation is a great example of an
organisation that carefully considered which funding vehicle was best to employ
to achieve its desired impact. Established in 2016, ACT Foundation is a grantmaker
supporting local, national, and regional NGOs focused on entrepreneurship,
leadership, health, and the environment. At inception, ACT Foundation considered
implementing its programmes directly, driven by a desire for greater oversight
and control. But that was before it identified a gap in the philanthropy ecosystem.
CEO Osayi Alile explained: ‘We were of the opinion that we needed more African-
based, local grantmakers. We have too many implementers, and a lot of NGOs are
not getting the resources that are needed.’ ACT Foundation also wanted to work in
various communities, so it engaged with NGOs that were based in those communities
given their experiences on the ground. Since its establishment, ACT Foundation has
invested over $5 million through its work and has supported 73 African NGOs in
over 120 communities. It funds organisational development for its partners, including
impact measurement, monitoring and evaluation, and governance support.
One of the African NGOs supported by ACT Foundation is Nigeria-based Project PINK
BLUE, which works to create awareness around cancer, provide oncology training, and
advocate for better cancer care and access to quality treatments. Having witnessed
widespread misinformation about cancer in Nigeria, and driven by the goal of reducing
late detection of cancer in the country, Runcie Chidebe founded Project PINK BLUE
in 2013. As he explained: ‘Many people in Nigeria do not have accurate knowledge
regarding cancer. There are a number of myths about cancer, including that it is not
treatable and it is a “white person’s disease”. Project PINK BLUE is, therefore, engaged
in demystifying cancer and advocating for better access to detection and treatment
in Nigeria.’
For many years, Project PINK BLUE struggled to raise funds for prostate cancer due to
the perception in Nigeria that cancer was a ‘woman’s illness’. In 2017, the organisation
secured a multiyear grant from the ACT Foundation. This grant enabled Project PINK
BLUE to provide prostate screening, treatment navigation, and support to more than
1,500 men, the largest prostate cancer screening in Nigeria to date. Chidebe hopes
the existence of a local grantmaking foundation like ACT Foundation will inspire
other African high-net-worth individuals and philanthropic organisations to start
engaging in grantmaking activities.
Project PINK BLUE is inspirational in terms of the impact it has had across its various
areas of focus. With respect to cancer awareness, Project PINK BLUE produces and
distributes cancer awareness materials in multiple Nigerian languages and educates
people about the disease over social and traditional media. Each year, the organisation
arranges a cancer awareness walk, attracting more than 5,000 individuals. To prevent
late diagnosis, Project PINK BLUE provides free cancer screening to poor, rural, and
hard-to-reach communities in Nigeria. To date, the organisation has conducted more
than 30,000 breast, cervical, and prostate cancer screenings. Project PINK BLUE
22
has also expanded to support patients throughout their treatment regimes. Under
advocacy, Project PINK BLUE is encouraging the government of Nigeria to make
cancer a national health priority issue. Over the years, Project PINK BLUE has driven
policy changes such as the inclusion of cancer treatment in Nigeria’s national health
insurance and the passing of a bill into law in 2016, and presidential assent of the law
in 2017, to establish a National Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment.
Project PINK BLUE has growth aspirations, including launching a mobile application to
reach more people and starting a diagnostic centre to run clinical trials and conduct
cancer research. However, these ambitions will only be possible with a significant
uptick in philanthropic support. Not surprisingly, Project PINK BLUE is enthusiastic
about seeing greater numbers of philanthropists engaging in funding practices that
give African NGOs the best chance at succeeding. This includes providing unrestricted
funding, giving to endowments, and providing capacity-building support.
23
Barriers Standing Between African NGOs
and Grants
Our research identified five barriers that constrain funding flows to African NGOs across the
grantmaking value chain. This list is by no means exhaustive, but the barriers do represent
the most pervasive issues surfaced in this research. Bias, the fifth barrier, cuts across the
other barriers and across the grantmaking value chain. But it applies to different funders in
varying degrees and in different ways. For example, while racial bias is an important barrier
for the sector to address, some grantmakers are more advanced than others in their journey
to confront this systemic issue. For others, gender bias warrants equal attention.
Figure 6. Barriers across the value chain

African NGOs
Strategic Diligence & Funding &
1 2 Sourcing 3 4
alignment selection ongoing support
Many grantmakers Donors struggle When an African NGO When African NGOs
either have no to identify and has made it through the secure funding, they
intention or stated effectively source sourcing process, it often often receive small,
strategy to fund African NGOs. falls out of contention short-term, restricted
Barriers
African NGOs, or More than 70% of our during the diligence and grants. This precludes
they fail to put survey respondents selection process NGOs from investing
appropriate goals and identified sourcing in building strong
processes in place as a top barrier to organisations and thus
funding African NGOs doesn’t support long-
term sustainability
• Focus on outcomes • Inadvertently • Exclusionary • Anchoring on

only, without exclusionary grantmaking criteria historical giving
consideration for sourcing policies. informed by Western- to inform future
organisational For example, anti- centric views, e.g. grant sizes, making
makeup solicitation policies definitions of scale, it difficult for
• Lack articulation and mandates to that prioritise ‘breadth’ organisations to
of the long-term, only fund US 501(c) vs ‘depth,’ favouring reach the next
systematic value (3) institutions large organisations and level of funding
of funding African • Inequitable access discrediting community- • Disproportionately
NGOs to social networks centric organisations focusing on notions
Potential drivers
• Perception of within the global • Grantmaking criteria of absorptive

African NGOs as philanthropic that does not recognise capacity, often
requiring more community the differentiated rooted in donor
oversight and • Viewing previous assets of African NGOs, preferences rather
support than donor donors as markers of e.g. lived experience than NGO potential
typically provides credibility • Setting unrealistic • Adopting a view of
• Perception of • Defaulting to expectations for ‘risk’ that weights
African NGOs sourcing networks historically under- potential risks to
as higher risk that do not have a resourced NGOs, e.g. donors over the
strong knowledge of expecting a randomised risks of causing
the local context or control trial, which is a harm or of reduced
African NGOs costly investment for impact from
an NGO insufficient support
of African NGOs
5 Bias
24
Our interviewees and our secondary research all pointed to the following barriers across
four stages of the grantmaking value chain (see Figure 6 on the previous page):
1. Strategic alignment. Many grantmakers either have no intention or no stated strategy
to fund African NGOs, or they fail to support an intention to do so by putting appropriate
goals and processes in place.
2. Sourcing. Donors struggle to identify and effectively source African NGOs. More than
70 percent of our survey respondents identified sourcing as one of the top barriers to
funding African NGOs.
3. Diligence and selection. Even when an African NGO has made it through the sourcing
process, they often fall out of contention during the due diligence and selection process
due to exclusionary criteria and decision-making norms.
4. Funding and ongoing support. African NGOs that do secure funding too often receive
small, short-term, restricted grants. This funding does not ensure long-term sustainability
and precludes NGOs from investing in building strong organisations.
The fifth barrier: Challenging historical biases

Our research also unlocked a more nuanced and pervasive barrier impacting African NGO
funding and recognition: bias. Bias was named as a significant barrier to funding reaching
African NGOs by 45 percent of our survey respondents.
Indeed, it’s often bias that drives a lack of

trust in local leaders and their organisations,
which over 70 percent of our survey
respondents named as a significant barrier.
‘There’s this lens ... that you’re
from Africa and people might have
The trust deficit goes hand in hand with some misconceptions about your
perceptions of risk, which in turn leads to ability to manage money really well.
restricted, short-term, or one-off funding, That becomes a blocker.’
as well as the addition of burdensome
ANGELA ODOUR LUNGATI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
requirements for, and increased oversight of, USHAHIDI
African NGOs. ‘There’s this lens … that you’re
from Africa and people might have some
misconceptions about your ability to manage money really well. That becomes a blocker’,
said Angela Odour Lungati, executive director of the Kenya-based NGO Ushahidi.
‘There is a significant lack of trust related the capacity of African NGO leadership’, said
independent consultant Shelagh Gastrow. ‘That’s how most people think. ... Local leaders
can’t deliver on contracts, they could be involved in corruption, they won’t report honestly,
all those things are part of the image that frequently dominates international donor
thinking about Africa.’
25
Broadly speaking, the biases infiltrating the grantmaking process include:
• Familiarity bias. When sourcing organisations to fund, funders tend to identify and
fund known leaders or show a preference for familiar credentials. This approach may
inadvertently exclude African organisations from consideration where social networks
are not inclusive. ‘[Funders are] used to people using the same jargon, we’re used to
having people make well-articulated presentations; there is a capacity-building part of
this, but we also really need to meet local organisations on their own terms’, believes
John Collenette, executive director of the Vitol Foundation.
• Racial bias. Similar to the conversation around racial bias and funding disparities for
leaders of colour in the United States, interviewees noted that African-led organisations
are forced to contend with similar biases. Referring to the racial reckoning in philanthropy
in the United States, Kennedy Odede of Shining Hope for Communities (SHOFCO)
wrote: ‘The legacy of racial injustice extends far beyond those borders and any honest
reckoning must include open dialogue around race in international development.’23
Compounded by the legacy of colonisation and power dynamics between high- and
low-income economies, racial bias can permeate the entire grantmaking process,
informing assumptions that impact sourcing, diligence, and working relationships.
• Cultural bias. Several interviewees noted a prevalence for Western communication
styles, not to mention a reliance on the English language, which automatically puts
many African NGOs at a disadvantage. We heard that concepts such as ‘polish’ and
‘professionalism’—deeply subjective terms, especially across cultural contexts—are
defined often by uniquely American or European standards, again stacking the cards
against some African organisations.
In recent years, leading philanthropy organisations, such as the Segal Family Foundation,
Ford Foundation, and Mastercard Foundation, have looked within their institutions and
challenged traditional structures and ways of working as well as individual mindsets
and beliefs.
One senior executive from a non-African foundation said this was a trend to watch. ‘We’re
all having very tough internal conversations, because we’ve realised that we have been
perpetuating a lot of colonial thinking and mindsets that have not allowed us to be as
impactful as we can be. And so these are uncomfortable conversations. But I know that
several of the main philanthropic organisations are getting external help to have these
conversations and think around it.’
Many of the interviewees highlighted not only increased awareness around this issue, but
a concerted effort to change existing practices in a meaningful way. The Vitol Foundation’s
Collenette said: ‘People have used the Black Lives Matter movement and COVID as an
opportunity to reflect more deeply on the structural issues that can get raised about
development generally and to ask whether the theorising about the kind of buzzwords
such as implicit bias and white gaze has been followed up in terms of practical action.’
23 K. Odede, ‘Closing the race gap in philanthropy demands racial candour’, The Guardian, September 7, 2020.
26
For African funders, the picture is more complex—some interviewees noted that the
presence of operating foundations speaks to a pervasive lack of trust in African NGOs, at
best, and explicit bias, at worst. We also heard opportunities for greater equity from African
grantmaking organisations. Nazeema Mohamed, executive director of South African NGO
Inyathelo, noted: ‘It’s sad to say that there’s so much work to be done around diversity,
equity, and inclusion. A lot of successful non-profits have had leaders who possess the
social and cultural capital that allow them to navigate dominant paradigms that are often
Euro- and US-centric. And so, you see that funders continue to give to these non-profits,
whose leaders comfortably fit within a particular world view and match the prototype of
who is considered a successful leader. We call these [NGOs] the “Rolls-Royce non-profits”.
… I don’t know if Black [African] female leaders would have had the same success. It feels
like we have to work so much harder to be recognised as successful leaders.’
While we did not speak with many operating foundation funders who were considering
shifting their strategy to funding African NGOs, there are some examples of African
funders who have done this. For example, Zimbabwean philanthropists Strive and Tsitsi
Masiyiwa, in addition to their operating foundation, Higherlife Foundation, have also
founded the impact investing and grantmaking Delta Philanthropies. Zvichapera Katiyo,
the Group CEO of Delta Philanthropies, explained that establishing the organisation was
driven by the desire to extend the breadth of impact through collaboration with existing
implementing partners. Delta Philanthropies analyses each project through the lens of
what would be the best partnership arrangement to yield maximum impact. As Katiyo
explained: ‘In many instances, our selection of able partners has been informed by their
proven expertise to efficiently deploy resources and achieve desired outcomes.’
27
Call to Action: Unlocking Funding for
African NGOs
The barriers highlighted above have been driven by a number of interrelated factors and
historical dynamics in philanthropic giving. Unless funders address these barriers, we
run the risk of perpetuating the cycle of underfunding suffered by many African NGOs.
Fortunately, there are tactical solutions that funders can implement in response to the
barriers identified above. (See Figure 7 on the next page.)
We acknowledge that not all funders have the capacity or infrastructure to gear their
grantmaking processes towards increasing funding to African organisations. For funders in
this position who still wish to increase their funding of African NGOs, there are re-granting
platforms on the continent that focus on funding proximate leaders and organisations.
Prominent re-granting organisations include the African Women’s Development Fund, Kenya
Community Development Fund, TrustAfrica, and the African Visionary Fund. (See ‘Spotlight:
The Kenya Community Development Fund’.) These organisations not only provide an
avenue for other donors to channel funding to African organisations, but also provide
additional support, including coaching and capacity building.
Strategies for addressing bias

Potential pathways to addressing bias include training and transforming funder organisation
teams as well as empowering African leaders and organisations. Our interviewees highlighted
three areas:
• Transforming teams through training. In recent years, the Skoll Foundation has sought
to understand how to cultivate a more diverse and inclusive pipeline, drawing on research
and examining its processes.24 Other global organisations on record as rolling out anti-bias
programmes designed to tackle both conscious and unconscious biases include the
Hewlett Foundation25 and the SD Bechtel Jr Foundation.26 By building this awareness
into their processes, they hope to uncover inequities across the grantmaking portfolio
and challenge neo-colonial dynamics within their organisations.
• Addressing bias in decision making. Our interviewees noted steps that can reduce bias
from the grantmaking process, including moving to a blind reading of application pools
and establishing clear, objective criteria in advance of decision making. In addition,
minimising reliance on written applications in English can mitigate bias and expand
opportunities for organisations and leaders from different backgrounds.
24 B. Boettcher and A. Gilbert, ‘Opinion: we need to fix implicit bias in philanthropy. Here’s how’, Devex,
January 30, 2019.
25 L. Bartczak, L. Valerio and C. Taylor, Hewlett Foundation OE-DEI Grants Final Report, Community Wealth
Partners, September 2019.
26 SCVNews.com, ‘Thurmond Announces Mini Grants Available to Provide Anti-Racism, Anti-Bias Educator’,
press release, September 25, 2020.
28
Figure 7. Potential solutions across the value chain
African NGOs
Strategic Diligence & Funding &
1 2 Sourcing 3 4
alignment selection ongoing support
• Review your portfolio • Tap into local networks • Revise grantmaking • Use forward-looking
and practices to by, for example, criteria, recognising and data to ground
identify and diagnose approaching local rewarding the unique investments. Balance
problems incubators and funders assets of African NGOs various data points
• Set clear goals for referrals • Address systemic when determining
around funding • Invite African NGOs barriers in the diligence investment size for
African NGOs and and leaders to process where models organisations, placing
share these with networking events have been informed by a higher weight on
others who can hold and forums Western experiences current and future plans
Potential solutions
you accountable • Build organisational • Increase decision-maker • Rethink absorptive

• Be clear about the capacity to accept proximity to African capacity with a
differential value and grant proposals in NGOs by, for example, multiyear frame.
associated trade- local languages establishing local teams Instead of withholding
offs of African NGOs or empowering existing transformative funding,
• Accept equivalency
compared to INGOs, local teams with decision- span it over a number
determinations
and make intentional making authority of years, enabling
where international
decisions across your NGOs to plan their
registration is • Engage community
portfolio work over a longer
a requirement stakeholders to
timeframe
understand depth
of impact • Give unrestricted
funding so that African
• Assess whether
NGOs can invest
reporting requirements
in building strong,
are unjustifiably
resilient organisations
burdensome
• Vitol Foundation is • African Visionary • Co-Impact now puts • Mott Foundation

reviewing its portfolio Fund’s referral network more emphasis on an views its multiyear
of grantee partners largely consists of organisation’s ability to funding approach
on the subject of local fellowships and navigate local political as a way to give its
diversity, inclusion, incubators, and they economy factors in partners longer term
and representation. plan to launch a peer addition to technical support that allows
They are looking referral system later design. It also takes a them to focus on
at a number of this year to further more flexible approach to doing the work
dimensions, including remove barriers evidence requirements, • When Thousand
headquarters to entry in recognition of the Currents first started
location, and the • DRK Foundation fact that Global South 35 years ago, then
identity of the utilises an open organisations may not named IDEX, it gave
management team application process have resources to invest shorter-term project-
and board in evidence generation specific funding,
Examples
• Co-Impact translated
• Mastercard its last call for • Skoll Foundation has but starting in 2000
Foundation has proposals into four added an equity lens for it shifted to giving
committed to other languages in each dimension of its longer-term core
ensuring that at addition to English investment rubric funding
least 75% of its • DRK Foundation is • Segal Family
• Segal Family
partnerships are with establishing a presence Foundation provides
Foundation runs
African organisations in Nairobi, Kenya wholly unrestricted
equivalency
determinations for • Thousand Currents has funding to all partners.
all its non-501(c)(3) amended its reporting The organisation also
partners templates to just one provides multiyear
question, ‘What would funding following
you like us to know the first year of
about your work and partnership
what has happened in
your organisation over
the past year?’
5 Bias
29
• Striving for greater inclusivity. The secret ingredient here is to ensure diversity and
representation in leadership and decision-making structures, from judging panels to board
composition. Funders might consider expanding their in-region presence, empowering
regional teams to make grantmaking decisions, and partnering with organisations that
are truly in-community, to open up strong applicant pipelines and encourage diversity.
We also acknowledge that the strategies in Figure 7 and in the section above are framed from
the perspective of non-African grantmaking foundations. The same value-chain approach
could be used by African grantmakers who typically default to funding public-sector entities
or implementing solutions directly to evaluate whether African NGOs are a viable option
to deliver more impact. Likewise, the strategies could be used to address other funding
disparities, such as for female leaders or for leaders from other marginalised communities.
Spotlight: The Kenya Community Development Fund

Founded in 1997, the Kenya Community Development Fund (KCDF) is one of the
oldest African grantmaking organisations we interacted with during our research.
KCDF raises funds both locally and internationally from corporations, trusts, private
foundations, and individuals, and awards grants to community-led, grassroots
organisations in Kenya, both in service of project execution and capacity building.
KCDF’s consistent grantmaking criteria, which prioritises grantees that demonstrate

good governance and accountable leadership, have a clear track record of success
and demonstrate evidence of community involvement in the development of their
proposed project. The organisation operates in line with the Kenyan spirit of ‘Harambee’,
which holds that positive and long-lasting change is possible when communities
are empowered to contribute to their own upliftment and development rather than
being reliant on handouts or external involvement.
The rationale for this approach was explained to us by Janet Mawiyoo, former executive
director of KCDF. Looking back to the early days of the organisation, she told us:
’It was very clear that the way aid was being delivered, it was not achieving what is
really desired. It was creating dependency, it was like a deficit thinking where you
are not looking at actually, what is in the continent.’
KCDF has partnered with over 2,000 proximate organisations that, on very limited
budgets, are able to create outsized local impact, especially under the guidance of
KCDF’s connections to resources and capacity building. KCDF has been successful
at lifting up community-driven solutions and supporting the success of its grantees.
Over the past 24 years, KCDF has disbursed approximately $25 million in grants to
community-led projects, impacting the lives of more than 2.5 million people.
Donors partnering with KCDF have the opportunity to strengthen and amplify the
impact of local organisations. As articulated by Mawiyoo: ‘We’re not an intermediary
or a pass-through. We do a lot of value-add to the grants that we are passing
down. We help grassroots organisation scale up their operations through access to
resources and technical support.’
30
Conclusion
Through our research and wide-ranging interviews with key players across the African
social sector, it is clear that there is a growing urgency to overcome the funding barriers
that persist in keeping African NGOs underfunded and unsupported.
This was reinforced during 2020, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, when a number
of international organisations evacuated their non-African staff, leaving African NGOs to
deliver critical services on the frontline. As Dedo Baranshamaje and Katie Bunten-Wamaru
wrote in The Guardian newspaper: ‘When the global pandemic hit, guess which NGOs pulled
staff and fled the continent? Here’s a hint: it wasn’t the locally led organisations. Just as with
endless previous crises, African-led organisations have risen to the occasion and delivered
to communities when others cannot. This isn’t new. Grassroots organisations are consistently
delivering impact at the frontlines—without the benefit of frontline funding.’27
The withdrawal of key international personnel from the frontlines had a ripple effect. African
NGOs had to stretch already overextended budgets to augment life-or-death interventions,
support often under-resourced government health interventions, and ramp up humanitarian
efforts. There are myriad examples of African NGOs stepping up to fill the void, including
Gift of the Givers in Southern Africa, Lwala Community Alliance in East Africa, and DRASA
Health Trust in West Africa. For Janet Mawiyoo, former executive director of KCDF, the value
of having organisations on the ground, close to communities, and in tune with their needs
was essential during the coronavirus response. ‘COVID, I think, has confirmed that’, she
told us. ‘Basically it is saying that the people who are near communities understand what
is going on. They have been part of it. So if you want a solution on how to come out, they
are very key in helping you figure out how to deal with the situation you have. If you are
serious about sustainability, this is a structure you can’t ignore.’
Even as many high-income countries begin to turn the tide against the pandemic with
vaccine rollouts in 2021, low-income countries continue to see low rates of vaccination,
in part due to vaccine shortages. As a result, at the time of this writing, those organisations
already on the ground, already battling organisational challenges and funding shortages,
remain the last line of defence.
If the role played by African NGOs during the ongoing COVID-19 crisis tells us anything, it’s
that building robust, strong, supported, and effective African organisations is essential—as
a means not only of responding to global crises like COVID-19, but also to the day-to-day
and continuing needs of communities battered by poverty, global inequalities, the legacy
of the past, and political and social challenges.
Fortunately, funders—both those from the continent and those from the rest of the world—
can meaningfully address the barriers to funding African NGOs. By re-examining practices
and addressing organisational and individual biases at every stage of the grantmaking
value chain, new opportunities for impact will emerge.
27 D. Baranshamaje and K. Bunten-Wamaru, ‘Aid spending In Africa must be Africa-led—it needs A Black Lives
Matter reckoning’, The Guardian, January 11, 2021.
31
The likes of Friendship Bench in Zimbabwe and Nigeria’s Project PINK BLUE highlight
the impact that NGOs born and bred in Africa can make in communities when donors
choose to look at the issues through the lens of those on the ground. This is a challenging
paradigm shift for many philanthropic bodies around the world, but one that holds
tremendous potential for communities and individuals.
As Dr Bhekinkosi Moyo of CAPSI explained to us, the philanthropic world has long missed
out on the potential inherent in smaller African NGOs. ‘I think that’s a missed opportunity
because I have seen how some of these groups actually become bigger and stronger
and, because they are actually embedded in the community, their interventions are more
impactful than when you come from outside, you parachute in and then you leave.’
We leave you with this thought: Is it time to leave the parachutes behind?
Key research assumptions

Our research built on the methodology explored in ‘The Landscape of Large-Scale
Giving by African Philanthropists in 2020’28 and The Landscape of Large-Scale Giving
by African Philanthropists: A Research Brief,29 released in February 2021 and June
2020, respectively. In order to calibrate and contextualise across funding segments,
we applied (where relevant) different parameters to identify large gifts from African
funders, as compared to gifts from non-African funders.
Notable assumptions shaped our methodology:

• We selected $1 million as the threshold for grant size among African donors to be
included in the sample. To determine the total amount of the gift in USD, we used
the exchange rate from the month and year that the grant was made, and rounded
numbers where appropriate. (The threshold for large gifts from non-African funders
is $10 million).
• We only included gifts from sub-Saharan African donors to causes or organisations
in sub-Saharan Africa and excluded gifts these donors sent outside Africa.
• We focused on gifts to ’social change’, using a definition adapted from The
Bridgespan Group’s big bets research in the United States.30 Of note, our definition
excludes gifts to arts institutions and religious causes, and includes gifts to academic
institutions. The sample does include gifts to religiously motivated organisations,
such as faith-based NGOs.
• We did not differentiate between individuals and their personal foundations when
identifying grants.
• We included in our database grants from corporate foundations, in addition to
private funders, when the purpose of the gift fit our definition for social change.
(Corporate foundations were excluded from the non-African gift sample.)
28 S. Hayi-Charters et al., ‘The Landscape of Large-Scale Giving by African Philanthropists in 2020’.

29 J. Schwier et al., The Landscape of Large-Scale Giving by African Philanthropists: A Research Brief.
30 W. Foster, G. Perreault, A. Powell and C. Addy, C., ‘Making Big Bets for Social Change’, Stanford Social
Innovation Review, Winter 2016.
32
Mosun Layode is the executive director of the African Philanthropy Forum. Jan Schwier
is a partner in The Bridgespan Group’s Johannesburg office, where Maddie Holland is
a manager. Siya Hayi-Charters and Soa Andrian are also consultants in Bridgespan’s
Johannesburg office.
The authors would like to thank Cara Bouwer of Crazy Grape Media, and Bridgespan Senior
Editorial Director Larry Yu, Managing Editor Carole Matthews, and Partner Nidhi Sahni for
their vital collaboration on this work.
About the African Philanthropy Forum

African Philanthropy Forum (APF) was established in 2014 to build a learning community
of strategic African philanthropists and social investors committed to inclusive and
sustainable development throughout the continent. APF supports the development
of homegrown philanthropy in Africa in order to transform the culture of giving on the
continent. Over the years, APF has established a stronger presence on the continent, with
footprints in Egypt, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Morocco, Nigeria, Rwanda,
South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zimbabwe through its regional meetings, conferences,
and initiatives. APF has also invested in the development of two volumes of the Toolkit for
African Philanthropists and the ‘Why Give’ Series, which consists of interviews with Africa’s
strategic philanthropic leaders to showcase their motivations for giving.
About The Bridgespan Group

The Bridgespan Group is a global nonprofit that collaborates with social change
organisations, philanthropists, and impact investors to make the world more equitable
and just. Bridgespan’s services include strategy consulting and advising, sourcing and
diligence, and leadership team support. We take what we learn from this work and build
on it with original research, identifying best practices and innovative ideas to share with
the social sector. We work from locations in Boston, Johannesburg, Mumbai, New York,
and San Francisco.
33
AFRICAN PHILANTHROPY FORUM

LAGOS 14 Chris Maduike Street Lekki Phase 1, Lagos, Nigeria. Tel: +234 803 729 1889
JOHANNESBURG Anslow Office Park, 8 Anslow Crescent, Bryanston, 2021, Johannesburg,
South Africa
THE BRIDGESPAN GROUP

BOSTON 2 Copley Place, 7th Floor, Suite 3700B, Boston, MA 02116 USA. Tel: +1 617 572 2833
JOHANNESBURG Bridgespan Africa Initiative, 10 The High St., Melrose Arch, 2076, Johannesburg,
South Africa. Tel: +27 11 012 9280
MUMBAI Bridgespan India Private Limited (registered address), 9th Floor, Platina, G Block, Plot C 59,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, 400051, India. Tel: +91 022 6628 9624
NEW YORK 333 Seventh Avenue, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10001 USA. Tel: +1 646 562 8900
SAN FRANCISCO 88 Kearny St., Ste. 200, San Francisco, CA 94108 USA. Tel: +1 415 627 4500
contact@bridgespan.org
www.bridgespan.org contactindia@bridgespan.org
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND License.
To view a copy of this license, visit http://www.bridgespan.org/about-us/terms-and-conditions

Disparities in Funding For African Ngos Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disparities in Funding For African Ngos Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disparities in Funding For African Ngos Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disparities in Funding for

Barriers Standing Between African NGOs and Grants��������������������������������������������������������������24

Call to Action: Unlocking Funding for African NGOs������������������������������������������������������������������28

Our organisations came together because of a shared commitment to strengthening

Coming together in this moment

In Africa, there is continued growth in wealth accumulation and in private philanthropic

Mosun Layode Jan Schwier

Friendship Bench’s story began in 2006, when Zimbabwean psychiatrist Dr Dixon Chibanda

Friendship Bench’s story is not unique. Rather, it is one of innumerable examples of

To add to this discourse, we conducted interviews with more than 60 stakeholders

African funders Non-African funders

Predominant funding vehicles: Predominant funding vehicles:

Methodological nuances to note: Methodological nuances to note:

Funding disparity Funding disparity

Large gifts from African funders Large gifts from

Figure 2. How much of a problem is the funding disparity?

Additionally, our observation on funding disparities faced by African organisations is

Total value of US foundation

5.9%of this money went to

Total amount spent by the US, Total international

1.0%of this money is estimated

What constitutes an ‘African NGO’?

Headquarters location was a helpful place to start, because headquarters can

Source: The Bridgespan Group

Some interviewees said it was an important consideration if the founder of an

Finally, the level of community engagement was named as an important component.

‘Where the company ‘The organisation serves

Our conversations with interviewees have helped us to gather a multitude of reasons as to

The importance of proximity for non-African funders

Others expressed scepticism or concern about the presence of operating foundations.

Undoubtedly, there is amazing work underway by philanthropists on the continent who

fundamental freedoms on the continent,

Therefore, in parallel with conversations

are not about the gap in funding “local

Figure 6. Barriers across the value chain

• Focus on outcomes • Inadvertently • Exclusionary • Anchoring on

• Perception of within the global • Grantmaking criteria of absorptive

Source: The Bridgespan Group

The fifth barrier: Challenging historical biases

Indeed, it’s often bias that drives a lack of

Strategies for addressing bias

you accountable • Build organisational • Increase decision-maker • Rethink absorptive

• Vitol Foundation is • African Visionary • Co-Impact now puts • Mott Foundation

Source: The Bridgespan Group

Spotlight: The Kenya Community Development Fund

KCDF’s consistent grantmaking criteria, which prioritises grantees that demonstrate

Key research assumptions

Notable assumptions shaped our methodology:

28 S. Hayi-Charters et al., ‘The Landscape of Large-Scale Giving by African Philanthropists in 2020’.

About the African Philanthropy Forum

About The Bridgespan Group

AFRICAN PHILANTHROPY FORUM

THE BRIDGESPAN GROUP

You might also like

Barriers Standing Between African NGOs and Grants��24

Call to Action: Unlocking Funding for African NGOs��28