Fundraising Partnership Models

In a world increasingly shaped by #conflict, #displacement, and #disruption, the role of #humanitarian institutions is becoming central to global resilience. A new term is quietly gaining traction: PPPP – Public, Private, and Philanthropy Partnerships. This emerging model recognizes that no single sector can address today’s complex humanitarian challenges alone. We’ve seen this model succeed globally: • In #Ukraine, where philanthropic funds and tech companies have complemented government aid in real time. • In #Ghana and #Rwanda, where vaccine distribution was accelerated through collaborations between governments, philanthropic funds, and private logistics players like Zipline and DHL. • In #Turkey and #Syria, where earthquake relief was driven by a mix of public funding, private logistics, and global donations. Now, the GCC is entering this space in a more structured way, and not just through donations. The region is preparing to fill a humanitarian and NGO gap that traditional players like USAID and DFID have left behind. Both the #UAE and #KSA are already setting the tone: • UAE’s Dubai International Humanitarian City is the largest global logistics hub for humanitarian aid. • KSA’s KSrelief is rapidly becoming one of the world’s most active humanitarian donors. • New regional partnerships are emerging that combine private sector innovation with philanthropic capital and government coordination. In this turbulent global context, the GCC is becoming an essential power in the humanitarian ecosystems. And with this comes both responsibility and opportunity: to build more inclusive, localized, and future-ready responses to global crises. #PPPP #MiddleEastLeadership #Sustainability #Philanthropy #GlobalResilience #CenterForSustainableFuture Rudolph Lohmeyer Beth Bovis Valentin Lavaill Maha Al Horr Kearney Kearney Middle East and Africa

I often think about the difference between being a funder and being a true partner. Through Cisco Social Impact Investments and the Cisco Foundation, we provide funding to organizations working at the forefront of social innovation. That support is critical, and we’re intentional about honoring its role. At the same time, we try to ask ourselves a broader question: how can we show up in ways that go beyond funding itself? Every nonprofit needs capital. But many also need access to technology, strategic guidance, specialized expertise, and networks that can help them scale and strengthen their work. We think about this as 1 + 1 = 3. Where it makes sense, we pair funding with technology. If the right infrastructure or stronger cybersecurity can accelerate impact, we lean in. We offer advisory support when it’s helpful, whether that’s thinking through growth, measurement, or long-term sustainability. If a partner needs highly specialized expertise, such as a cybersecurity assessment or a refined fundraising strategy, we tap into our ecosystem to connect them with the right people. Sometimes the value we can add is simple but meaningful. Hosting a partner at our offices so they can convene without additional expense. Presenting together at conferences to amplify their voice. Making introductions that create new opportunities. I believe this is where corporate philanthropy becomes most effective. Every company has assets beyond funding: talent, technology, relationships, credibility. The question is not just how much we give. It’s how intentionally we bring the full enterprise to the table. Because funding matters. But the multiplier often comes from everything around it.

How do we combine the best of public and private sector capital to fund critical economic infrastructure? Kier Starmer is at Labour party conference giving a clear message that the government wants to partner with the private sector to raise investment. How timely, then, that the latest abrdn #MacroBytes podcast is an interview with Bridget Rosewell, Chair of the M6toll and a non-exec director at the UK Infrastructure Bank, all about combining the public and private sector to fund infrastructure! Stretched public finances mean private capital is critical to fund the infrastructure necessary for future prosperity. Moreover, climate change, technological change, and demographic shifts are altering the sort of infrastructure we need in modern economies. Public sector capital is crucial to raising infrastructure investment because it can often borrow at lower rates and help crowd in the private sector. The private sector is critical because it can bring efficiency, capital discipline, innovation and – counter to some pre-conceptions – a long-term view removed from election cycles. But the private sector wants to see reform of the planning process, consistency of government policy, regulatory certainty, and a strategic vision aligned with long-term economic goals. 🎙 Listen to the pod to hear more -> https://lnkd.in/gE2iwkWQ

Why Only CSR? When we design an implementation strategy or a program for community upliftment, the default approach often revolves around NGOs and CSR funds. But why stop there? Here’s a thought: Alongside CSR, why don’t we also consider the government as a partner? There are countless government schemes and welfare programs that remain underutilized and often because communities are unaware, or because access is difficult. If NGOs bring in CSR funding and tap into government support, we create a three-way collaboration: ✨ NGOs – implementing on the ground with deep community connection. ✨ Corporates (CSR) – providing critical funding and resources. ✨ Government – ensuring communities access schemes and entitlements. This reduces the over-dependence on a single stakeholder: * Not all pressure on the NGO to stretch limited funds. * Not all expectations on the CSR partner to provide more. * Government schemes reach the people they are designed for. The result? A holistic program that is sustainable, scalable, and impactful. So, the next time we’re raising funds or designing a project, let’s integrate all three players. True community transformation happens when collaboration replaces silos. and I'm sharing this from my personal experience. What do you think??

Harvard Business Review just published what many nonprofit leaders know deep down (but can't always express). In a new piece, Wei Shi, a professor at Miami Herbert Business School, makes the case that companies treating nonprofits as philanthropic recipients are leaving serious competitive advantage on the table. Here's what he found: 🔹 Nonprofits are boundary spanners: they connect government, regulators, communities, and advocacy networks in ways corporations simply can't replicate. 🔹 They reduce uncertainty: nonprofits often see policy shifts coming months before formal rulemaking begins. That's early warning intelligence most companies are paying consultants for. 🔹 They reveal blue ocean markets: community organizations understand unmet needs that have driven innovations in mobile banking, micro-savings, and community health programs. 🔹 They build capabilities: sustained collaboration develops stakeholder engagement skills that traditional market research can't deliver. Shi's taxonomy of engagement - transactional giving, board service, and strategic partnerships - is spot on. And his conclusion is one I've been making to nonprofit leaders for the past couple of years: Writing a check is the lowest-value move in the room. The nonprofits winning corporate partnerships right now aren't positioning themselves as causes worth supporting. They're positioning themselves as assets worth investing in. They're showing up with data. With community intelligence. With coalition relationships that take years to build. That's not philanthropy. That's strategy. If you lead or advise a nonprofit, this article is worth your time, and so is the question it raises: Are you showing up to corporate conversations as a recipient...or a partner?

Most companies stumble before they even start when trying to partner with local government.  I've spent my career brokering innovative public-private partnerships that benefit consumers and companies — ensuring technology serves people, not just the businesses producing it. As Chief Innovation Officer of San Jose, I orchestrated a $500M investment in 5G deployment from multiple large telecom firms across the city, and worked with the City Council to commit $24M to a citywide Digital Inclusion Fund, closing the digital divide for 1M+ residents. I also brokered dozens of city innovation pilots with companies ranging from autonomous vehicle and robot delivery startups to established names like Meta and Airbnb. Here are my top tips for making a public-private partnership actually work: Build the right team first. Successful partnerships are built by many – city staff, council champions, community advocates, and company partners. Surround yourself with people who understand both sides of the table. Align incentives on both sides. Are you looking for a fast process? Is the city looking for a larger investment to justify prioritizing your project? Know what each side needs before you sit down. Identify the real blockers. What needs to be true for city leadership to get behind your efforts? Work backward from there. Negotiate on mutual value. The best deals leave everyone feeling like they won something. Get ahead of the press. It's better to own the narrative than to be outed mid-negotiation. Bring the public along early. Traditional public hearings are just one tool — think creatively about how to engage the local community in ways that build genuine enthusiasm and support. Cultivate engaged advocates. Know who's in your corner, and make sure you understand the positions of those who aren't. Manage all the political players. The City Council isn't your only stakeholder. Agency staff can make or break a project — treat them accordingly. Be honest about where you are on the innovation curve. Pilots require special procurement exemptions. Seek out cities with established innovation programs — it will save you significant time and money. Understand procurement upfront. Are there insurance requirements that seem excessive? Work with agency staff early to carve out the right exemptions before you're deep in the process. Seek out the right expertise. Local lobbying firms can help, but former city employees who now run consulting firms are often even more valuable for navigating the nuances. Where things go wrong: Wasting city time without clear project timelines or honest communication about staff impact. Relying solely on lobbyists instead of building direct, good-faith relationships with staff and elected officials. Pushing tech that's too early or too narrowly conceived to genuinely benefit the city. Blaming or shaming local officials when things get hard. And underestimating how thick a skin you'll need for the public debate.

How PPP Can Help Fund Healthcare The Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model is a valuable approach to funding healthcare, but it is not a universal solution to all financial challenges in the healthcare industry. Here’s a breakdown of its potential benefits, limitations, and alternative approaches: 1. Infrastructure Development Governments can leverage private investments to build hospitals, clinics, and diagnostic centers. Examples: The UK’s Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and India’s National Health Mission (NHM). 2. Technology & Innovation Private sector expertise can introduce AI-driven diagnostics, digital health records, and telemedicine. Reduces operational inefficiencies and improves patient outcomes. 3. Operational Efficiency Private entities bring better management, cost control, and efficiency. Example: Contracting private companies for hospital maintenance, catering, and logistics. 4. Reduced Government Burden Governments can redirect funds toward primary healthcare, preventive medicine, and research. Allows a focus on policy and regulation rather than day-to-day management. 5. Increased Access to Healthcare PPPs can expand healthcare services to rural and underserved areas. Example: Indonesia’s BPJS-Kesehatan, which integrates private and public providers. Challenges & Limitations of PPP in Healthcare 1. Profit vs. Public Interest Conflict Private firms seek profit, while governments prioritize affordable, universal care. Risk: Overpricing or neglecting non-profitable services (e.g., mental health, geriatric care). 2. High Costs & Long-Term Debt Governments often take on long-term financial commitments, leading to future debt burdens. Example: The UK’s PFI model led to debt repayment crises. 3. Regulatory & Governance Issues Weak regulatory frameworks can lead to corruption, inefficiencies, and lack of accountability. Requires strict legal contracts and oversight mechanisms. 4. Equity & Access Concerns Risk of healthcare becoming more commercialized, leaving lower-income populations underserved. Example: High costs of privatized hospitals in low-income countries. Is PPP the Best Solution for Healthcare Funding? PPP alone cannot fully solve healthcare funding issues but works best as part of a mixed financing model that includes: ✅ Government Funding & Public Health Insurance (e.g., NHS, Medicare, Medicaid) ✅ Private Investments & Philanthropy ✅ Medical Tourism & Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) ✅ Innovative Financing (e.g., Health Bonds, Crowdfunding, Digital Health Insurance) Final Verdict PPP can be an effective tool for healthcare expansion and efficiency, but it should be carefully regulated to ensure affordability, quality, and universal access. It should be complemented by public funding, strong policies, and alternative financial models to create a sustainable healthcare system. Would you like insights on specific case studies or alternative funding models?

Hot take, strategic alignment is no longer the goal. Strategic co-creation is. Gone are the days when a cheque and a logo swap counted as a “corporate partnership”. Today’s best relationships don’t just align values, they create value. Together. Corporate giving is not about just ‘giving’ cash. Instead, it’s about shared innovation, equity impact, and meaningful engagement for employees and communities. What does this mean for charities? Fundraising products need to evolve. It’s not enough to pitch a sponsorship deck or ask for payroll giving. The offer needs to be custom designed for them not pre-packaged. It needs to be something that solves a problem for them as well as for you. Employee engagement can’t be an afterthought. Corporate partners want their people to feel part of something real. That means designing opportunities that are purposeful, not performative. Think skill sharing, storytelling, shared problem solving, not just branded t-shirts and photo ops. Impact has to go beyond financial ROI. Can you help them move the needle on their DEI goals? Sustainability? Innovation agenda? If not, someone else will. EDI and co-creation go hand in hand. If diverse voices aren’t involved from the start, it’s not co-creation, it’s a pitch. True collaboration means sharing power, truly listening, and sometimes being willing to start over. The old model said: “Here’s what we do. Fund it.” The new model says: “Here’s what we care about. What can we build together?” Corporate support is still essential. And it’s changing, fast. Is your charities offer keeping up? 📩 becky@beckyfrancisfundraising.co.uk

Philanthropy can play a powerful catalytic role in transforming education. 💡 A strong example comes from Lesotho, where the Roger Federer Foundation partnered with the Global Partnership for Education (GPE), the Government of Lesotho, and the local private sector to strengthen the national education system. In 2023, a US$2.5 million contribution from the Roger Federer Foundation unlocked an additional US$2.5 million from GPE’s Multiplier fund. These resources are supporting early learning and teacher training across five districts, reaching more than 57,000 children and 1,350 pre-primary and primary teachers. When Roger Federer visited Lesotho later that year with GPE leaders, it inspired local businesses to act. By 2024, the private sector had committed a further US$3.6 million – again matched by GPE. In total, more than US$11 million has now been mobilised to improve access, quality, and equity in education. What makes this story stand out is how philanthropy triggered system-wide collaboration. The Roger Federer Foundation’s early commitment helped bring together government, business, and development partners around a shared national plan. That collaboration is now evolving into a Private Sector Alliance for Education and a proposed trust fund to sustain future investment. As Maya Ziswiler, Chief Executive Officer of the Roger Federer Foundation, said: “Every human being has the right to inclusive and quality education to make the most of their potential. The creativity and collaboration amongst the government and its partners to deliver on this human right for Basotho children is inspiring. We should hold up this collaboration as an excellent example for the power that working across public, private and philanthropic sectors can have to positively impact communities, particularly those most vulnerable.” A clear reminder that when philanthropy acts as a catalyst – and in genuine partnership with governments, local organisations, and the private sector – it does not just fill funding gaps. It helps unlock lasting, system-level change. Read more in the attached.

Philanthropy is quietly rewriting its own playbook. And the new generation isn’t content to just fund change - they also want to co-create it. At the recent United Nations General Assembly and Concordia gatherings, a clear pattern emerged: collaboration and system innovation now sit at the center of giving. Foundations, endowments, and family offices are moving from transactional donations to participatory problem-solving. Some numbers tell the story: 💡 According to the Alliance magazine 2025 Global Philanthropy Report, 73% of next-gen donors now prioritize partnerships that “shift power to communities.” 🌍 MENA foundations like Abdulla Al Ghurair Foundation and Sawiris Foundation for Social Development are experimenting with philanthropy-as-platform models — blending capital, data, and networks to co-design solutions. 🧠 And globally, initiatives like Co-Impact and Lever for Change are proof that pooled, collaborative funds can drive systems-level results far faster than isolated grants. This is the new frontier: from cheque-writing to challenge-crafting. Real impact happens when philanthropists act as architects - convening coalitions, aligning incentives, and creating shared accountability. It’s a shift I’ve seen firsthand in my advisory work - when funders move from giving to guiding, entire ecosystems unlock. 💭 Happy to dive deeper if you’re rethinking how your foundation or endowment collaborates - its been fun and exciting to co-create these models with bold thinkers wanting to shift global paradigms in giving.