Do non-profits genuinely embody the causes they champion, or do they become pawns in a larger game of influence? Credit: Shutterstock.
By Debra Nhokwara and Tafadzwa Munyaka
NEW YORK, Feb 16 2024 – In the realm of public discourse, non-profit organizations often serve as the torchbearers of societal change, championing causes ranging from environmental conservation to social justice. Yet, beneath the altruistic facade lies a complex interplay of interests, where non-profit funding emerges as a potent tool for shaping the narrative and driving the agenda.
As we delve into the depths of this seemingly benevolent sector, it becomes evident that the allocation of funds to non-profits is far from arbitrary.
Rather, it serves as a strategic maneuver by various entities, each seeking to advance its unique vision and influence public opinion. Our contention, as many have opined, is to explore how non-profits, fueled by financial support, navigate the delicate balance between advocacy and the potential distortion of public discourse.
At the heart of the matter is the question of intentionality. Do non-profits genuinely embody the causes they champion, or do they become pawns in a larger game of influence?
By examining case studies and patterns in funding distribution, we can uncover the motivations behind the financial support that drives these organizations. This exploration will underscore the significance of transparency and accountability in ensuring that non-profits remain true to their mission and avoid unwittingly becoming instruments of agenda-driven manipulation.
As nations strive for progress and prosperity, the international donor community’s approach to providing aid and development assistance reveals a disconcerting inconsistency–one that sets different rules and conditionalities based on the regions involved
How does the selective support of certain causes over others shape the national discourse? What implications does this have for marginalized voices and underrepresented issues? By analyzing the ripple effects of non-profit funding on the agenda-setting process, we can better understand the mechanisms at play and work towards a more equitable and inclusive public dialogue.
In confronting these challenging questions, this article invites readers to reconsider their perceptions of non-profits as mere conduits for positive change.
Instead, we encourage a nuanced examination of the funding mechanisms that underpin these organizations, emphasizing the need for a vigilant and discerning public to safeguard the integrity of the causes they hold dear. As we navigate the landscape of non-profit activism, let us peel back the layers and unveil the intricate dance between funding and agenda setting that shapes the narratives of our time.
How are funders influencing non-profits programming?
In the labyrinth of non-profit landscapes, financial sustenance is the lifeblood that allows organizations to translate their ideals into tangible action. However, the allocation of funds is not a mere administrative task; it is a deliberate and calculated strategy that often aligns with the interests of donors, thereby shaping the trajectory of public discourse.
To the potential recipients of the funding, they have to strategically position themselves, selling their projects or programs as best fits for the stated funding criteria, oftentimes, way off the mark of their missions or values. Consider, for instance, the funding patterns in environmental advocacy.
Nonprofits dedicated to climate change may find themselves in a delicate dance, balancing the imperative to address the impending ecological crisis with the preferences of their financial backers.
Corporations with vested interests in certain environmental policies may selectively fund organizations that align with their profit-driven agendas, inadvertently steering the narrative away from holistic, sustainable solutions. This dynamic underscores the critical need for transparency within the nonprofit sector, as the sources of funding can significantly influence the prioritization of issues on the public agenda.
Moreover, the intentional or unintentional distortion of advocacy goals becomes apparent when examining the delicate relationship between nonprofits and government funding.
Organizations reliant on governmental grants may find themselves navigating a minefield of compliance, where the agenda-setting power of funding extends to the very policies that shape their advocacy landscape.
In such instances, the risk of inadvertent co-option is palpable, as the alignment of non-profit objectives with government priorities may compromise the independence necessary for effective societal change. Such scenarios lead to a mismatch between the advocacy issues and development aspirations of the community on one hand with the nonprofits funding desires on the other.
To truly comprehend the implications of non-profit funding as an agenda-setting tool, we must also turn our gaze inward, examining the choices made by individual donors.
Philanthropists, driven by personal convictions and values, may channel their resources toward causes that resonate with their worldview. While this may foster diversity in advocacy, it also introduces an inherent bias that echoes through the public discourse, emphasizing certain issues at the expense of others.
Popular views without financial backing are discarded for the fashionable ones dangled by those who wield the purse or strings to the funding so coveted by nonprofits.
As we grapple with these intricacies, the urgency of fostering a culture of accountability within the non-profit sector becomes paramount. Organizations must not only be transparent about their funding sources but also actively scrutinize the ethical implications of their financial relationships.
By doing so, they can ensure that their advocacy remains genuine and aligned with the true needs of the communities they serve. Furthermore, in light of many documented scandals involving donor international organizations in Africa, we need to ask ourselves tough questions, like, whose interests are being advanced and how we arrived at agreeing to champion them.
What does History tell us?
The history of non-profit organizations in Africa is intricately woven into the fabric of the continent’s socio-political landscape. As Africa navigated its post-colonial era, a burgeoning need for social change and development gave rise to a diverse array of non-profit entities.
These organizations, fueled by a commitment to addressing pressing issues, have played a pivotal role in shaping the continent’s destiny, identity, and standpoint(s) regarding access to funding mechanisms.
The dynamic relationship between African non-profits and international organizations in agenda setting to address, inter alia, poverty, healthcare, education, and governance issues in Africa has been complex, multifaceted and largely one-sided.
This begs the question that has been asked by several others before us without satisfactory answers, “what are NGOs really doing in Africa?” Historically, the power dynamics have often leaned towards international organizations, even though the roles and influence of African non-profits have evolved over time.
It is common cause that in the aftermath of colonial rule, African nations grappled with the challenge of nation-building and establishing robust governance structures.
Nonprofits emerged as instrumental agents of change, serving as conduits for both local and international support. As the New African puts it, this international support appears as “a prominent part of the ‘development machine’, a vast institutional and disciplinary nexus of official agencies, practitioners, consultants, scholars, and other miscellaneous experts producing and consuming knowledge about the ‘developing world’”.
During this period, grassroots movements and community-based organizations proliferated, fueled by the desire to address the unique challenges faced by diverse African societies marked by an exponential increase in the presence of Western NGOs as well in Africa. Challenges faced by these burgeoning non-profits relating to funding and agenda setting are essentially still the same, just different days but same problems.
The latter half of the 20th century to present times, has seen a surge in international solidarity and aid efforts directed towards Africa. Non-profit organizations are conduits for this support, channeling resources to address pressing issues.
The relationships formed during this era have presented a continuity of the dependency syndrome and a stark realization that the Global North lacks the moral and political will to constructively assist Africa address her myriad of problems.
Maybe, we need to revisit the development discourse to unravel how agenda setting has been an instrument used to determine how African non-profits access funding. Understanding this discourse and historical journey is crucial for unveiling the power play inherent in non-profit or development funding as a strategic tool for agenda setting on the continent.
A tale of varied rules and conditionalities
The realm of international development, ostensibly guided by principles of equality and global cooperation, often belies a stark reality of double standards. As nations strive for progress and prosperity, the international donor community’s approach to providing aid and development assistance reveals a disconcerting inconsistency–one that sets different rules and conditionalities based on the regions involved.
When it comes to human rights and governance, the double standards within international development become even more glaring. Conditions related to democratic governance, human rights, and rule of law are inconsistently applied, often reflecting the geopolitical interests of the donor countries.
Some non-profits in specific nations receive aid with a blind eye turned to issues of governance and human rights abuses, while others face stringent scrutiny, fostering a sense of injustice and reinforcing the perception that the principles guiding international development are, in fact, malleable.
We have seen this happen with staff of organizations that have violated the very people they should be serving without a reciprocal free in funding or access to it. Yet, if tables were turned and a local non-profit organization is found wanting, “how these issues are handled varies wildly”.
Addressing these double standards within international development requires a collective reevaluation of the principles guiding aid and assistance.
It calls for a commitment to equity, transparency, and consistency in applying conditions. Only through a more just and impartial approach can the international community hope to foster genuine global development that transcends geopolitical considerations and prioritizes the well-being of all nations, regardless of their geographical location or economic standing.
The way forward
Who gets to determine what issue is worth funding? The one with the money will want to exert control over how their funds are utilized. The community facing a particular issue would want to prioritize solving that problem, albeit without resources to do so.
We believe this is one of the conundrums local non-profits are faced with on a daily basis. The result is always the same, dance to the tune of one who pays the piper! However, ideally, we envisage a move towards participatory grantmaking or better still, access to unrestricted funding.
Due diligence still has to be done to ensure recipients are fiscally responsible. The removal of restrictive conditionalities might give local non-profits and the communities they serve the willpower to address their most pressing and urgent needs as defined by lived experiences. Again, it is a discourse that we are ready to engage in and learn from others too as we advocate for improved funding mechanisms.
As engaged citizens, advocates, and stakeholders in the pursuit of positive change, it is imperative that we actively participate in reshaping the landscape of non-profit activism. We encourage readers to scrutinize the sources of funding supporting the causes they hold dear and demand transparency from the non-profit sector.
By engaging in conversations about the influence of funders on non-profit programming and agenda setting, we can collectively foster a culture of accountability within the sector. As we advocate for a shift towards participatory grantmaking and unrestricted funding, we should empower local non-profits to address their communities’ most pressing needs authentically.
This calls for a reevaluation of the current funding structures and a commitment to equity, transparency, and consistency in applying conditions, particularly within the realm of international development.
By doing so, we can work towards a more just and impartial approach that prioritizes the well-being of all nations, irrespective of their geographical location or economic standing. By championing transparency, accountability, and equitable funding practices, we can contribute to a more authentic and impactful non-profit sector that truly serves the needs of the communities it aims to uplift.
The nexus between non-profit funding and agenda setting is a multifaceted phenomenon that demands our attention. To preserve the integrity of the causes championed by these organizations, we must remain vigilant, questioning the motivations behind funding decisions and advocating for transparency.
Only by unraveling the complexities of non-profit financing can we pave the way for a more equitable, inclusive, and authentic public discourse—one that transcends the strategic play of funding and genuinely addresses the pressing issues of our time.
Debra Nhokwara is a multi-disciplinary content creator who works in the social impact industry.
Tafadzwa Munyaka is a nonprofit/social change professional with crosscutting expertise in fundraising, program management, and child rights advocacy.