Has COVID-19 changed philanthropy?

COVID-19 and philanthropy: the present

The response of the grantmakers to the COVID-19 pandemic has, in some respects, been fantastic – practical, swift and generous. Say over here in Switzerland, Foundation Botnar donated CHF 20 million to research efforts within a couple of weeks of the World Health Organization announcing a pandemic. 

Such examples have been replicated globally and that is great to see. By some estimates we were at USD 12 billion in increased, COVID-19-specific giving by mid-2020 alone.

Initially, there were all sorts of pledges being signed. Donors promised to make the process simpler for grantees, to give more money overall, to allocate to those who needed funds the most, etc. I can be critical of such initiatives, since often pledges amount to little more than PR stunts. But, in this case, they made sense as a cautious expression of intent. At first, it was difficult for many foundations to know how to respond beyond “pledging” since having an actual response strategy was tough. After all, governments themselves were struggling (and still are) to respond, not to mention the international community.

Then, along came the vaccines. That gave many funders a sense of clear mission: make sure the shot is available to anyone on the planet, free of charge. Projects like the People’s Vaccine Alliance have been pushing for this, and others, such as the Gates Foundation, which committed hundreds of millions of dollars to its COVID-19 effort, have been pouring money into vaccine research throughout the crisis, helping greatly accelerate the progress.

There has been criticism along the way, for sure. Some have criticized the Gates Foundation’s process for its lack of transparency, the perceived protection of the pharma industry and their IP rights and monopolies, and the exclusion of activists from the tables where vaccine-related decisions are taken. Effectively, the skeptics lament, the response is being run by an unelected and unaccountable foundation. Be that as it may, the effects have been undeniable.

COVID-19 and philanthropy: the future

One question looking ahead is: does this mean that philanthropy has changed and that it will from now on be a more direct, more involved force for good in the society, even after the pandemic. I am still to be convinced about that.

Every social and economic crisis sends philanthropy through a bit of a cycle. Management consultants publish reports about how this is the opportunity to be more agile and more equitable, supporting real change and disadvantaged communities. Then pundits start pointing to examples of how this is already happening and everyone gets excited. Then the crisis ends and we are back, more or less, to business as usual – lengthy grant application processes, poor support for the civil society and the minorities, etc.

If this seems like an overly skeptical view then look no further than the Great Recession. Yes, the Recession saw a drop in global giving, rather than a rise. This was because the philanthropists themselves were hurting more than they are today. Wall Street just had a fantastic 2020, despite the raging pandemic. The wealthy can afford to be generous. 

Why did the crisis a decade ago not lead to a simplification of the grant process, more allocation to diverse communities, more focus on systemic change? Calls for that were arguably just as prominent as they are today, not only among the activists but among the wealthy as well. And yet we collectively, first the society and then philanthropy as its component, failed to rise to the challenge. This caused a spiral of political polarization and disillusionment of which the current social tensions are an unfortunate result.

Philanthropists, not events, change philanthropy

The other narrative is that COVID-19 will be a watershed. After this, philanthropy will be generous, agile, activist, and have its eyes fully open to the systemic problems of the world. I think this is also unlikely. Philanthropy is a slow-moving, slow-changing field that has been notoriously reluctant to innovate. One exogenous event, however major, will not be enough to erase decades of established thinking, habits and practices. We will be back to long grant applications and pet projects in many cases.

The truth about what lies in store is not only somewhere between the two narratives, but also in a way independent of the COVID-19 crisis. Sure, philanthropic practices will continue to evolve slowly and tentatively. But, in a fundamental sense, only two things can change philanthropy for good. One is the government, with its incentives; the other are the philanthropists themselves. Since on the government side change in the field has been glacial, it is up to individual funders to change the way they do business, or not. Outside events and epiphanies can only be an inspiration to do something that you were planning to do anyway, or you always felt was the right thing to do but never had the courage or the time.

We wrote a series of pieces at the beginning of the crisis targeted at the civil society movements in our portfolio. One was about fundraising during the pandemic and was quite technical. The other was more philosophical, and its title was The virus won’t change the world: your actions will. The exact same truth holds for philanthropy and philanthropists, I believe.