Posts in Philanthropy
What Election Day to Every Day Means to Us

Moving Beyond Election-Centric Democracy Philanthropy

The Democracy Fund recently launched a new sign-on letter aimed at encouraging funders to continue supporting their democracy grantees beyond Election Day. We at the Democracy Funders Network (DFN) echo this sentiment and applaud Democracy Fund’s leadership in the space. Rather than simply signing on to the letter, however, we wanted to issue a “concurring opinion” to elaborate on some of its key points and deepen the conversation about the challenges highlighted in the letter, along with some potential solutions.

Here are three key things we hope every democracy funder will take away from the letter:

1) Revitalizing liberal democracy in the U.S. is a years-long task, and we need funders to be in it for the long haul. No matter who wins the presidential election in a few weeks, American democracy will remain fragile. The worst thing funders can do in response to the election is to walk away—either out of a sense of hopelessness or overconfidence about democracy’s prospects. It will admittedly not be easy for some to muster the energy to keep going in either circumstance, but what will all the resources we’ve devoted to protecting and revitalizing our democracy be for if we abandon the effort midstream?

While it may be too late to ask most funders to develop their 2025 strategies before knowing the outcomes of the election and the dynamics of the post-election environment, it is essential that donors begin considering the possibility of creating a multi-year democracy strategy that stretches beyond the next presidential election cycle. We agree with the letter’s call for multi-year funding as the gold standard that helps to create stronger organizations and a more stable field, and we encourage all funders to use it with their existing grantees wherever possible. We also recognize that funders often face various structural and psychological barriers to providing extensive multi-year funding. For those who are hesitant, a multi-year strategy can still create more stability in your grantmaking that can in turn help bolster your grantees and the broader field.

What if every democracy donor went through the exercise of developing a five-year strategy? Such a strategy would not need to be a rigid plan that locks in all your funding and activities far in advance; the best strategies are guides that can be reviewed and revised along the way. If democracy funders writ large pursued this approach, we believe our collective resources would ultimately go a lot farther. Even more so if we do some of this strategy development together. (Expect to hear from DFN on this front soon).

2) Democracy is about more than elections, so those of us who care about it need to ensure we are not just scaling up our giving in election years. The “Election Day to Every Day” letter addresses an incredibly challenging dynamic in democracy giving: the boom-and-bust cycle through which donors ramp up their giving in election years and then retract it immediately after each election. This kind of giving is highly inefficient at best and ineffective at worst. We are not going to solve the problems facing our democracy investing election cycle by election cycle, nor will this approach allow us to move from a reactive posture to a proactive one. By funding in this manner, we miss the opportunity to strengthen local civic life and ongoing civic engagement, improve the capacity of the state to deliver for its citizens, rebuild independent journalism, and combat polarization, among dozens of important priorities. As Daniel Stid has argued in A Framework for Democracy Philanthropy, democracy funders will find “more room to maneuver” if we can focus greater resources on long-term efforts in communities and fewer on near-term national politics.

Additionally, the more we let underlying problems fester by overweighting our resources on elections and in election years, the more expensive our elections become. Estimates are that upwards of $16 billion will be spent in partisan political giving alone this year, which is about half of what the entire democracy space raised in 2022, the last year for which we have solid data, according to the new U.S. Democracy Hub.

While the boom-and-bust cycle is most pronounced for organizations that do election-related work such as voter registration, election administration, crisis preparation, and combatting disinformation, it is also true for just about every kind of organization in the field. Whatever you fund, your grantees—and the issues they work on—need steady support. We know how difficult this can be in practice, as the boom-and-bust cycle is at least in part due to a very human dynamic: we often feel compelled to “go big” when it comes to elections, but most of us cannot sustain that level of giving year after year. Moving beyond this cycle doesn’t mean you can’t give less next year, but it does mean not letting your grantees starve in 2025. More importantly, it means resisting the temptation to go meaningfully bigger in 2026 and 2028 and instead finding a steady state for your democracy giving. (Here again a five-year strategy can help). The only way to solve long-term problems—and to do so at anything approaching a reasonable cost—is with long-term strategies and long-term commitment.

3) The work of protecting American democracy is becoming increasingly fraught, and funders need to be cognizant of how they and their grantees can remain both safe and effective. Fighting for a more just and inclusive democracy has always been difficult, but the level of threat facing those working to defend our democracy—election administrators, disinformation researchers, grassroots organizers, journalists, funders, and many others throughout the system—has grown to extreme levels. Funders need to be investing in the safety and security of their grantees and the broader field, and they also need to be taking their own operational security seriously. (DFN can be a resource on both fronts). This is true across civil society, not only in the democracy space: as American politics becomes more polarized and autocratic actors seek opportunities to undermine U.S. democracy, funders and nonprofits—as independent sources of power in American life—are increasingly being targeted. This is only likely to grow in the coming years—again, no matter who is president.

Finally, funders looking to remain both safe and effective, and who would like to see their grantees do the same, will need to re-examine some of their core assumptions and approaches as they develop new strategies. We should all be inspired daily by the groups fighting for our democracy, but we should also be cognizant that many of the forces we have been up against in recent years, including toxic polarization, rampant misinformation and disinformation, threats to core democratic institutions, and support for authoritarian politics, have grown worse. We in philanthropy owe it to American democracy to be thoroughly introspective about where our efforts are failing—and even where they may be making things worse. For instance, when funders and organizations feel under threat, we tend to become both more polarized and polarizing. But in an era of “high conflict,” donors may want to reconsider funding initiatives that further polarize, radicalize, or increase misunderstanding and dysfunction in our society.

Only by remaining fully engaged—financially, emotionally, and intellectually—can we carry on the work of ensuring the U.S. is a robust liberal democracy a century from now. Here’s hoping we are up to the task.

Becoming Futures Ready: How Philanthropy Can Leverage Strategic Foresight For Democracy

While pro-democracy actors work to defend our democratic and electoral institutions in the near term, securing and strengthening our democracy also necessitates cultivating a longer term, affirmative orientation. DFN’s Better Futures Project is excited to announce the publication of a new toolkit, Becoming Futures Ready: How Philanthropy Can Leverage Strategic Foresight For Democracy, to build the strategic foresight skills of funders and to expand the field’s capacity to envision a bold, lasting vision for our democracy. 

Read the full toolkit here.

Closing Civic Space in the United States: Connecting the Dots, Changing the Trajectory

In this new report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Dr. Rachel Kleinfeld examines how over the past two decades, dozens of governments have used regulations, laws, and vilifying narratives to restrict the ability of civil society organizations to act and speak. Now, a similar set of tactics is being rolled out in the United States. What should philanthropists and organizations expect, and what can be done?

From the report:

CLOSING SPACE INTERNATIONALLY

“The absence of civic space was a hallmark of Cold War totalitarianism. There was the individual, and there was the government; any attempt to organize regular people to act or speak publicly in even innocuous ways—such as a birdwatching league, a home church, or a small arts magazine—had to be monitored and approved by the ruling party or crushed.

The blossoming of civil society across the former Soviet Union and many other once-closed societies was among the strongest signals that the 1990s wave of democracy was not only toppling authoritarian regimes but also growing roots. Organizations, interest groups, religious congregations, open media, and the free exchange of ideas helped people find their voices, locate their communities, and push their governments and societies to do things that they cared about.

Then, in the mid-2000s, democracy started to recede globally. And the walls started to close in on civil society.”

Read the full report here>>

An Update: What Happens as it Happens Here? U.S. Philanthropy, Civil Society, and the Authoritarian Threat

In this brief update of the January 2023 report, we summarize how the trends we observed have become even more worrying. With implications for every funder's work, authoritarian populists have strengthened their hold on government power and are using it to restrict freedoms across a wide swathe of American life. Regardless of the programs or issue areas you fund, whether you're socially conservative or progressive, we hope the report and update will act as a guide to the challenges ahead and encourage greater collaboration across programmatic and institutional lines in defense of liberal democracy.Rising authoritarianism in the U.S. has the potential to profoundly damage civil society and the philanthropy that supports it, damage that itself has the potential to further accelerate autocratic rule.

What Happens if It Happens Here? U.S. Philanthropy, Civil Society, and the Authoritarian Threat

The size, strength, and diversity of American philanthropy and civil society are unique in the world. These institutions have a key role to play in first stopping and then reversing the trend of democratic backsliding.

Authoritarians know this, which is why they have set their sights on civil society organizations and their funders. Groups working to ensure free and fair elections, reform police practices, or defend the rights of Muslim, Jewish, or LGBTQ Americans are among those contending with official harassment and threats of violence encouraged by politicians and rightwing media. Prominent funders have been targeted as enemies of “real Americans” and threatened with asset seizure. These examples, as well as the experiences of people in U.S. states and foreign countries undergoing democratic decline, tell us what might be coming. The warnings are all around us.

Changing the nation’s trajectory for the long term will involve work for which philanthropy and civil society are uniquely suited: helping Americans bridge divides and come together to build a fully functioning system of self-government. Doing so will demand taking on illiberalism on both left and right. In the near-term, however, philanthropy will have to contend with growing authoritarian factions on the right that are using government power, and even political violence, to gain and maintain control – and that threaten philanthropy and civil society itself. The danger comes from those who are no longer interested in the give and take of policy making, of negotiation and compromise, and who reject one of the key principles that make democracy work: the willingness to lose to the other side.

READ THE UPDATE>

READ THE ORIGINAL REPORT>

Field in Focus: The State of Pro-Democracy Institutional Philanthropy

Philanthropic support for promoting a healthy democracy has grown in recent years, marking a period of transformation for the field. Since 2016, an influx of funding, actors, and philanthropic infrastructure has amplified the impact of pro-democracy efforts while infusing the movement with needed dynamism.

At the same time, from a funder perspective these developments mean that today’s ecosystem is increasingly complex, confusing, and difficult to navigate. Sustaining the benefits of this transformation while avoiding the pitfalls of rapid growth requires a full understanding of funder capacities and needs.

Drawing insights from interviews and surveys conducted with 70 institutional funders, this report sheds new light on the state and direction of the democracy funding landscape.

READ MORE>

PhilanthropyThird Plateau
How Foundation Money Is Transforming Local News

The Cleveland Foundation, traditionally focused on grants for various community needs, shifted to support Cleveland Documenters in 2020, paying citizens to attend and document local government meetings. This reflects a broader trend of philanthropies, including major foundations like Ford and MacArthur, increasing funding for local journalism. The emphasis is on disseminating essential information rather than traditional investigative reporting. Initiatives like the Indiana Local News Initiative (ILNI) exemplify this shift, prioritizing community input and collaboration. The approach acknowledges the importance of addressing fundamental information gaps for civic engagement. Despite concerns about the limitations of citizen reporting, some initiatives, like Signal Cleveland, successfully combine community involvement with traditional coverage. Overall, this evolving landscape represents a new approach to meet information needs and enhance civic engagement beyond traditional newspapers.

READ MORE>

How Funding Local News Ecosystems Helps American Communities Thrive

Reliable information fuels our lives. We need to know who is on the ballot, what’s happening in our schools, where to find rental assistance, and how to make change in our neighborhoods. From daily reporting that equips people to act, to huge investigations that reveal corruption, the health of local news is bound up with the health of our democracy.

Over five years, Democracy Fund has invested $11 million in six geographic areas across the U.S., where residents and institutions are collaborating to better meet their communities’ real information needs.

This report tells the story of how Democracy Fund grantees created positive impact in their communities through innovative, locally-driven solutions. It also shares lessons for funders and local leaders interested in advancing a more equitable future for local journalism. As more funders consider local collaborative funding, we hope that this report will serve as a valuable resource.

We believe that funding local news ecosystems is an equitable way to support local news because it is rooted in community listening and redistributing resources to areas of greatest need. ​​In 2023, we have committed $4.75 million over the next three years to the geographic areas highlighted in the report, as part of our new Equitable Journalism strategy.

READ MORE>

A Funding Guide for Faith and Democracy: Nothing Does What Faith Does Like Faith Does It

Over the last few years, the relationship between faith and democracy has been of growing interest to funders. While there has long been a robust debate in America about the proper relationship between government and religions, there is also a sustained and evolving relationship between faith and democracy. Plenty of headlines have spotlighted the ways they are influencing each other–both positively and negatively.

How are grantmakers to make sense of it all?

This new guide aims to explore the role of faith communities in shaping and making American civic life, while providing a framework for funders to engage with faith communities as partners in advancing a stronger and more inclusive democracy.

Who is this guide for?

This guide is meant for funders who are:

• Focused on democracy and civic life and want to increase their impact by engaging faith communities.

• Already investing in faith-inspired organizations but who are seeking a deeper understanding of the unique role those organizations play in the health of democracy and civic life.

• Anyone else who cares about the intersection of faith, democracy, civic engagement, and public life.

Read A Funding Guide for Faith and Democracy >>

2 Years After Jan. 6 Insurrection, Philanthropy Must Help America Envision a Better Future

We are living in a time of immense uncertainty and accelerating change. People who study the long arc of history and macro trends describe this moment variously as a time of cascading crises, shifting paradigms, and civilizational transformation akin to the scientific and industrial revolutions. Change of this magnitude — no matter how it is described — is inevitably disruptive.

Such disruption can enshrine a mythical past, tear down entire systems, or usher in something new and better. It’s up to leaders in philanthropy, civil society, government, and business to think and act in a manner befitting this critical moment. Collectively they can shape which disruptions eventually rule the day and how change is managed across society and its institutions.

This requires dispensing with a business-as-usual mentality that lulls people and institutions into falsely believing that the future will look like the present — that we have time to kick the can down the road on any number of issues. With immense problems to solve, including climate change, mass migration, technological challenges, rising inequality, and ascendant authoritarianism, the societal response must be commensurately immense.

What all this means for philanthropy is clear: The field must mobilize its resources, capture the public’s attention, and work together toward a better version of the future.

READ MORE>

Why Funders Should Stop Worrying and Learn to Love Democracy Giving

Here at IP, we’ve been thinking a lot about democracy funding lately. We marked the one-year anniversary of the January 6 insurrection last week, and it’s the start of another election year (hooray!). But that’s only part of it. Over the longer term, the heated debate around our imperiled democracy is unraveling closely held preconceptions about nonprofit funding, sending civil society into terra incognita.

Democracy and Civic Life: What is the Long Game for Philanthropy?

This essay series from the Knight Foundation and Kettering Foundation explores the challenges and opportunities for American democracy and what role philanthropy can play in addressing those challenges. It includes 18 pieces by leading thinkers on the future of our democracy including Francis Fukuyama, Antonia Hernández, Brian Hooks, and Yascha Mounk. READ MORE>