Customer Expectations For CSR

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

'the data reveals that artisanal mining for cobalt is a very hazardous vocation undertaken for basic survival, involving long hours, subsistence wages, and severe health impacts. The data further reveals that within the surveyed respondents, there is a high rate of forced labour and an almost 10% rate of child labour' Rights Lab, University of Nottingham recent report, Blood Batteries, The #humanrights and #environmental impacts of cobalt mining in the Democratic Republic of the Congo demonstrates the continued issues with cobalt mining. '- 36.8% of respondents met the project’s conservative criteria for forced labour - 9.2% of respondents met the project’s conservative criteria for child labour - 27.7% of respondents began working in artisanal mining as a minor - Not a single respondent was a member of a trade union, as none exist - Not a single respondent had a written agreement for their work . For those #supplychain and #procurement professionals who are able to trace cobalt to source there are potential steps to be taken: 1. Ethical and Responsible Sourcing Ensure traceability from artisanal and industrial mining sites in the DRC to final product, especially for cobalt used in EVs and electronics. Demand transparency from suppliers, require disclosure of sourcing practices, human rights due diligence, and environmental impact assessments. Prioritise suppliers who can demonstrate compliance with international labour standards and reject those linked to exploitative practices. 2. Environmental Stewardship Incorporate geospatial and water toxicity data into supplier evaluations to avoid contributing to ecological degradation. Promote circular economy principles such as battery recycling, reuse, and alternative materials to reduce dependence on high-impact cobalt mining. 3. Compliance and Governance Align with UK Modern Slavery Act, ensure supply chain mapping and annual transparency statements reflect risks in high-impact regions like the DRC. Embed environmental, social, and governance standards into tendering and contract management processes. 4. Practical Procurement Measures Use multi-quote and business case procedures to ensure value for money and ethical sourcing, as outlined in UK finance and procurement policies. Establish KPIs related to ethical sourcing, labour conditions, and environmental impact. Anticipate changes from the Procurement Act 2025 and EU Critical Raw Materials Act that may affect sourcing obligations. For the majority of buying organisations or as consumers this is a very difficult area, but as the report recommends Government's could do a lot more to reduce exploitation: 'Strengthen supply chain transparency and due diligence requirements of consumer-facing tech and EV companies with more robust legislation; laws should include strict and severe penalties as opposed to simple reporting requirements, including a potential import ban;'

🌍 Transforming Gold Sourcing for a More Responsible Electronics Industry Proud to share more about our visit to Geita, Tanzania, where we’re evaluating the Responsible Gold Credit System—an initiative designed to address the challenges of ethical gold sourcing in the electronics industry. At Fairphone, we’ve always prioritized ethical sourcing for materials like gold, tungsten, tantalum, and tin—minerals that often come from regions facing social and environmental challenges. This new system supports artisanal and small-scale miners (ASM) by offering gold credits for every gram of gold they produce responsibly. These credits finance improvement projects at the mines, even when physical traceability isn’t feasible across our extensive supply chain. Why this matters: 🔑 Artisanal mining supports over 45 million livelihoods worldwide and provides 20% of the world’s gold. Properly managed, it can be a force for good, driving economic growth and strengthening communities. 📋 Our mission is to ensure the Responsible Gold Credit System is robust and scalable, creating a replicable model for ethical gold sourcing in the electronics sector. 🤝 Collaboration with our partners—Solidaridad Network, Solidaridad East and Central Africa, The Impact Facility and Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO) | Partner in Sustainable Development—is central to this work, as we visit pilot mines like Nsangano and Mgusu to understand how best to support ASM practices. Being on the ground has given us a deeper appreciation of the daily realities these miners face, as well as insights into how responsible mining can empower communities and improve lives. Curious to learn more about this transformative initiative? Read the full blog here: https://lnkd.in/eUhSw-En Winifrida Kanwa Lisa Minère Kari-Anne Sandness Mary Mkonyi Stephen Kithuka Lewis Temple Calvin Laing Godwin Zimba Aron Vijzelman Gebre Marloes Philippo #ResponsibleMining #EthicalSourcing #Fairphone #Sustainability #CircularEconomy

We often talk about “miracles” in policy change, but real progress is built over time, not won overnight. In Minnesota, decades of engaging people whose voices are often excluded from democratic processes laid the groundwork for what became the “Minnesota Miracle 2.0.” As I share in my latest op-ed, published in Inside Philanthropy, this wasn’t a product of luck, but rather years of investing in community-based leadership, durable coalitions, and the necessary infrastructure to weather setbacks. The lesson for philanthropy? If we care about lasting impact, we must commit to the long view by:   ✅ Supporting organizations that are rooted in the community, with deep relationships and credibility.   ✅ Investing in infrastructure that helps these organizations collaborate.   ✅ Providing flexible, multi-year support.   ✅ Bridging the national and the local.   ✅ Attending both inside and outside strategies.   ✅ Considering joining funding collaboratives.  This is how we can invest in generational power-building. I invite you to read my full reflections and join the conversation on building stronger states together for the long haul. https://lnkd.in/gniWvAYg

In climate science, we talk a lot about tipping points. Melting ice sheets. Warming oceans. Biodiversity collapse. However, there’s another fragile tipping point that we rarely acknowledge: the flow of philanthropic capital. In my latest article for Alliance magazine, I explore what happens when climate philanthropy stalls, particularly for organisations in the equatorial south. In the past year, I’ve seen it happen up close. Funding pauses, donor hesitancy, mid-grant “realignments” – all with very real consequences for grassroots networks, youth-led collectives, and Indigenous communities. The pattern is clear: ~ Only 2% of global philanthropic funding goes to climate causes. ~ Of that, only 6% reaches African initiatives directly. ~ Most Global South grants are short-term, highly restricted, and demand “quick wins” over long-term resilience. When funding is designed to be brittle, it breaks exactly when it’s most needed. But there’s hope – and there are models doing it differently. From coalition-led funding pools like the CLIMA Fund, to UMI Fund, to feminist funds like Mama Cash – these approaches prioritise continuity over headlines, community over ego, and movements over moments. The question is no longer if money will dry up in moments of political or economic turbulence. It will. The real question is: who will be left to carry the work forward? ~ It’s the community custodians. ~ The youth networks. ~ The Indigenous knowledge keepers. ~ The technologists who code with care. And that’s exactly where our trust and funding should flow. 🔗 Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gSsSKzY5 🐝 Special thanks to Elika Roohi for featuring this conversation. #ClimateChange #Science #Philanthropy #Funding #Publications

Lengthy post, but I’ve considered this awhile and it’s time to discuss. Opinions are mine. Unfortunately, nonprofits in the social service & homeless service sectors face a critical moment. For too many, perhaps an existential one. Providers are stretched to the limit. Demand outpaces resources, leaving vital needs unmet. Funding streams are tightening, fragmenting support among many small providers. Workforce challenges deepen, and administrative burdens consume limited staff capacity. Leadership turnover threatens stability and severs relationships valuable to collective success. The result is a fragmented landscape in which mission-aligned organizations compete for the same dollars and resources, diluting collective impact. In a resource starved environment where need continues to escalate, nonprofits must work in fundamentally new ways if they are going to effectively serve communities that depend on them. This evolution will require organizations to move beyond tactical cooperation toward structural alignment and shared mission. Toward strategic collaboration & intentional partnerships that strengthen the entire ecosystem of care. A new model of nonprofit collaboration is required. I believe the Claremont Colleges consortium provides a useful example. The Claremont system consists of 7 independent colleges, each with its own mission and culture, that share centralized services, facilities, and governance structures. This design preserves institutional identity while enabling efficiency, synergy, and innovation across the consortium. A comparable consortium model among nonprofit service providers could preserve organizational distinctiveness while leveraging shared systems; reduce overhead costs through common administrative platforms; and expand service capacity & client outcomes through seamless collaboration across missions. Like the Claremont Colleges, nonprofits could maintain programmatic and cultural individuality while sharing the backbone systems that make their collective work more effective & sustainable. Such transformation from fragmented efforts to a coordinated system requires leadership to design governance models that honor both independence & interdependence. Foundations, policymakers, & innovators can play a catalytic role by supporting investments in collaborative infrastructure and leadership development. The task is not merely operational—it is visionary: to reimagine how the social service sector organizes itself for the future. The future of the social safety net will depend on our ability to reimagine our sector. By embracing consortium-style collaboration, grounded in trust, aligned values, and shared systems, we can move from forced competition to collective strength, resilience, and lasting community transformation.

Great partnerships don’t guarantee funding—but they do position you for lasting impact. In a shifting landscape, strategy and flexibility matter more than assumptions. Over the past few years, I’ve had the opportunity to advise and mentor nonprofit leaders navigating complex funding relationships—some thriving, others ending despite high performance. Here’s the truth: Even great outcomes and strong partnerships don’t always keep funders at the table. Sometimes decisions are driven by internal priorities, leadership shifts, or broader business realities—things no nonprofit can control. But what can be shaped is how nonprofits show up: With innovation. With strategic thinking. With confidence in what sets them apart and why it matters. From my experience, the most resilient nonprofit organizations:  🔹Initiate strategic conversations — not just about funding, but shared purpose and vision 🔹 Invite the right stakeholders in — those who influence and implement change 🔹 Highlight shared impact — amplifying what’s possible together, not just independently 🔹 Track meaningful outcomes — not to impress, but to improve 🔹 Communicate through change — because silence weakens trust 🔹 Design with sustainability in mind — preparing for shifts and building beyond a single funding cycle Here’s a simple truth: No funding lasts forever, so planning for sustainability is essential. Approach partnerships with flexibility, not permanence in mind. Be intentional. Be strategic. And above all, keep creating the unique value that only you bring. Nonprofits do more than deliver services—they design solutions that drive change. And in doing so, they must lead with the innovation, resilience, and boldness of entrepreneurs. If you’re navigating these challenges, you’re not alone. Let’s keep building, innovating, and leading with purpose. #NonprofitLeadership #CorporatePartnerships #SocialImpactStrategy #InnovationInAction #LeadershipLessons #StrategicAlliances #BusinessForGood

While everyone's talking about the funding crisis, forward-leaning NGO leaders are quietly experimenting with radically different approaches to sustainability. These aren't theoretical frameworks—they're real models being tested by organizations who refuse to wait for the old system to fix itself. Here are the four distinct models, each offering a different approach to building resilience in the post-BIG-aid era: 🤝 The Cooperative Model Inspired by Jacqueline Asiimwe Mwesige's NAFASI approach The Vision: Pool resources with peer organizations to create shared financial independence. Start with 3-5 partner organizations, each contributing modest monthly amounts to build collective resilience and reduce donor dependency. Key Operational Capability: Financial pooling + shared governance systems. Requires robust mechanisms for collective decision-making about resource allocation and transparent financial management across organizations. 🕸️ The Network Model Drawing from Kim Kucinskas's ecosystem approach The Vision: Transform from individual organization to network weaver. Focus on connecting, convening, and catalyzing rather than direct implementation. Measure success by ecosystem health, not program outputs. Key Operational Capability: Relationship mapping and network facilitation skills. Need to excel at identifying key stakeholders and designing convenings that create lasting connections. 💰 The Hybrid Model Based on Jenny Hodgson's blended approach The Vision: Combine "warm money" from communities with "cold money" from traditional donors. Build local donor bases while maintaining strategic international partnerships, creating co-owned, co-funded initiatives. Key Operational Capability: Dual fundraising and relationship management systems. Separate but integrated approaches for cultivating community donors and institutional funders, with different strategies for each. ✊ The Movement Model Following Jenna Thoretz's solidarity approach The Vision: Dissolve artificial boundaries between INGOs and local NGOs. Operate as one global civil society, sharing resources and power across geographic lines. Key Operational Capability: Cross-border collaboration and resource sharing platforms. Your organization needs systems for coordinating with international partners and sharing resources fluidly across boundaries. Each model requires different organizational DNA, leadership capabilities, and risk tolerance. Before choosing your path: ✅ Assess your organizational strengths: Which capabilities do you already possess? ✅ Evaluate your stakeholder readiness: Are your board, staff, and communities prepared for this shift? ✅ Consider your context: What regulatory, cultural, and competitive factors will impact your success? ✅ Plan your transition: How will you manage the operational and cultural changes required? Read the full essay series and dive deeper into these approaches. https://lnkd.in/gm_PSfV6

I told a room of criminal justice leaders they couldn't solve their biggest problem. Silence. One director leaned back. Another crossed her arms. They'd brought us in to reduce jail recidivism in Santa Clara County. And I just told them the solution wasn't in their control. "The major drivers of people returning to jail are housing and employment," I explained. "Not rehabilitation programs. Not what happens inside your facility." "So what are you saying?" someone finally asked. "You need to partner with organizations outside criminal justice. Housing providers. Employers. Workforce development programs." More silence. "You're telling us we can't solve this ourselves?" "No. I'm telling you that you can only solve this by working with people outside your domain." That's the uncomfortable truth about complex problems: The root cause almost never lives in your silo. → The healthcare org addressing food insecurity, not just medical care → The education nonprofit working on stable housing, not just curriculum → The workforce program tackling mental health, not just job skills Most leaders resist this. Because it means admitting: "I don't have the expertise to solve the real problem." Because it means sharing credit, budgets, and decision-making power. Because it's easier to keep doing what you know, even if it doesn't work. But here's what happened when Santa Clara County embraced cross-sector collaboration: They partnered with Goodwill and Catholic Charities for job training. Faith-based organizations for housing navigation. Behavioral health providers for comprehensive support. The result: 14% reduction in jail recidivism within the first two years. 73% of people who got jobs kept them for at least 90 days. Housing participants showed a 22 percentage point lower re-arrest rate. Because they stopped trying to fix recidivism within the criminal justice system alone. They addressed the actual root causes. So let me ask you: What problem is your organization trying to solve that's actually caused by something outside your usual domain? Is your strategy and strategic plan limiting you to solutions that won't work? And are you brave enough to admit you need partners who know more than you do about the real issue?

For nonprofit organizations, grants are a vital avenue for funding their endeavors and driving positive social change. Yet, beyond the meticulous crafting of proposals lies a potent yet often overlooked facet: relationship-building with potential grantors. Establishing and nurturing these connections can substantially amplify the likelihood of securing grants while forging enduring partnerships. Here are some key strategies for nonprofits to cultivate meaningful relationships with funders.   1. Precise Targeting: Conduct comprehensive research to pinpoint grantors whose mission closely aligns with your organization's goals. Tailoring your approach to those with shared values maximizes the chances of resonating with potential funders. 2. Compelling Communication: Craft a clear and compelling narrative that seamlessly weaves your mission, objectives, and impact. Ensure your story resonates with the grantor's ideals and demonstrates how their support can create tangible change. 3. Personalized Engagement: Invest time in understanding a grantor's background and interests. Initiate conversations that highlight specific overlaps between their philanthropic pursuits and your organization's mission. 4. Transparency and Reliability: Foster trust by being transparent about your organization's financials, challenges, and objectives. Clearly articulating how grant funds will be utilized and the projected outcomes reinforces your accountability. 5. Regular, appropriate and timely updates: Keep lines of communication open after initial contact. Share regular progress updates on your projects. But, be cautious not to overwhelm the funder. You can seek creative ways to do this e.g. short personalized video and audio notes. 6. Collaborative Outlook: Frame your relationship as a partnership rather than a transaction. Involve the grantor in decision-making and seek their insights, demonstrating that their role transcends mere financial contribution. 7. Appreciation and Acknowledgment: Express gratitude through thoughtful gestures like public recognition and event invitations. Demonstrating appreciation reinforces the grantor's value as a collaborator. 8. Long-Term Vision: Forge relationships with a view to the long term. Multi-year partnerships can foster stability for your organization and enable the grantor to witness the evolution of their support.  9. Continuous Nurturing: Steward relationships even after the grant concludes. Keep grantors apprised of developments, ensuring their involvement in your organization's journey remains intact. 10. Adaptive Flexibility: Tailor your approach to accommodate individual grantors' preferences, be it in communication style, engagement frequency, or interaction methods.   The power of relationships cannot be overstated. These strategies, meticulously applied, can transform potential funders into engaged allies, ushering in sustained financial backing, heightened visibility, and a shared impact on society.