Photo Illustration by AI
As climate change accelerates, disrupting lives and livelihoods across the globe, a critical question emerges: Are community philanthropic organizations prepared for the looming challenges?
A recent Indiana-based study by Beth Gazley, Rachel Cash, and Laurie Paarlberg, published in The Foundation Review (May 2025), sheds light on this pressing issue.
Though the study focuses on U.S.-based community foundations and United Way agencies, its findings offer timely and transferable insights for Africa’s rapidly urbanizing and climate-vulnerable communities.
Disruption Without Preparation
According to the study, half of the surveyed organizations in Indiana reported having already experienced service disruptions due to extreme weather events—hurricanes, floods, and ice storms—caused by climate change.
Yet, despite these direct impacts, the majority had not developed comprehensive climate resilience plans, nor had they initiated conversations with their boards on disaster preparedness and business continuity.
For African philanthropic organizations, particularly those embedded within communities prone to flooding, drought, and food insecurity, this inertia presents a cautionary tale.
The study conclusion is clear: the absence of climate preparedness in community-based Philanthropy undermines local resilience and hampers coordinated responses to disasters.
“We found a paradox. Community foundations, by design, are embedded and trusted local actors. Yet when it comes to climate resilience, many of them have not integrated disaster planning into their strategic roles,” write Gazley and her co-authors.
In Africa, where trust in local leaders and grassroots organizations is often stronger than in distant national agencies, the failure to leverage this embedded trust to build resilience would be a missed opportunity.
Political Sensitivities and Climate Denial
A striking aspect of the Indiana research was how politicized the climate conversation has become, even in philanthropic spaces.
Many leaders of community foundations admitted to being cautious about publicly acknowledging climate change, citing concerns about alienating stakeholders or appearing partisan.
“Some executives simply avoided using the term ‘climate change’ altogether,” the authors noted, opting instead for language like “weather resilience” or “disaster readiness.”
This has parallels in parts of Africa where environmental policy and action can be complicated by political allegiances, development priorities, or donor influence.
Yet, unlike the U.S., African philanthropic organizations often work directly with communities who face the immediate consequences of erratic rainfall, prolonged droughts, or failed harvests.
This proximity to need must be used to drive a more proactive, depoliticized climate agenda.
Community Foundations Lag Behind Peers
The research indicates that community foundations trail behind both United Way agencies and direct service nonprofits when it comes to implementing risk mitigation strategies.
While some organizations had taken steps like relocating servers, digitizing data, or adopting a hybrid
work systems post-COVID, few had conducted formal risk assessments or planned for future crises.
For African community philanthropy, where resources are often scarce and digital infrastructure less robust, these lessons are even more urgent.
Risk assessments and disaster planning don’t require massive budgets but rather a mindset shift—one that recognizes climate resilience is integral to long-term impact.
Africa’s traditional communal safety nets, informal community savings groups, and religious institutions can offer unique entry points for integrating risk mitigation strategies at the grassroots level.
But only if community philanthropic organizations begin to see climate
adaptation as a core to their mission.
Board Inaction and Strategic Blind Spots
One of the most troubling findings of the Indiana study was that few boards of directors were actively discussing climate risk.
Many board members reportedly perceived climate change as outside the scope of their fiduciary responsibilities.
Some executives feared that introducing such conversations might distract from short-term fundraising or donor relations.
This scenario is not unfamiliar in Africa, where many community-based organizations rely heavily on donor funding and often align their strategic priorities to match donor interests.
However, as global donors increasingly demand evidence of climate integration in programs—from the Green Climate Fund to the African Climate Foundation—it is imperative that African boards take climate risks seriously.
“Ignoring climate change is not a neutral position—it’s a strategic liability,” the researchers warned.
For African organizations, this means embedding climate resilience in board discussions, fundraising strategies, and impact reporting.
Toward a Culture of Preparedness
To remedy these gaps, Gazley and her colleagues offer several recommendations. First, depoliticize the conversation by anchoring it in local experiences.
Instead of abstract climate models, use stories of flooding, drought, or crop failure to demonstrate the relevance of climate planning.
Second, conduct community-centered risk assessments. These assessments should involve local voices, identify critical vulnerabilities, such as unreliable electricity or poor drainage, and propose actionable solutions.
African philanthropic hubs can take the lead by training their grantees and partners to carry out these assessments affordably.
Third, network widely. According to the study, the most climate-prepared organizations were those that regularly shared information with others, whether through associations, national philanthropy networks, or emergency response coalitions.
In Africa, platforms like the African Philanthropy Forum, or the East Africa Philanthropy Network, offers fertile ground for such exchanges.
“Collaboration—not isolation—will determine which communities survive climate shocks,”
The study emphasizes.
African community philanthropy must therefore go beyond siloed grantmaking and forge alliances with humanitarian actors, local governments, and climate scientists.
Philanthropy in a Warming World: Lessons for Africa
While the Indiana study is U.S.-centric, its implications resonate deeply in Africa, where over 80% of the population depends on climate-sensitive sectors like agriculture.
Unlike large private foundations, community philanthropy in Africa is deeply local, shaped by proximity, culture, and history. This embeddedness is a powerful advantage when facing climate change volatility.
What Africa can learn from the U.S. experience is not only the cost of inaction but also the importance of building organizational cultures that embrace foresight.
Foundations must budget for resilience, train staff in disaster preparedness, and allocate funds that can pivot quickly during emergencies.
Some African philanthropic organizations are already leading the way. The Kenya Community Development Foundation (KCDF), for instance, has piloted climate-smart Community development programs in arid counties.
In Uganda, the Integrated Seed Sector Development program partners with local philanthropic actors to improve seed resilience.
These examples demonstrate that African-led climate philanthropy is not only possible—it is already happening.
Yet, such efforts remain scattered. The real opportunity lies in mainstreaming climate consciousness across all community philanthropy in Africa—from slum upgrading in Nairobi to maternal health in rural Malawi.
A Call to Action
The climate crisis is not a future threat; it is a present reality. The Indiana study serves as a wake-up call—not just for American community foundations but for their African counterparts as well.
Africa cannot afford a philanthropic sector that is reactive rather than proactive. Nor can it rely solely on governments or international NGOs to provide climate solutions.
Community Philanthropic organizations—trusted, embedded, and proximate—must rise to the challenge.
They must plan. They must prepare. And most importantly, they must act.
“A foundation’s mission means nothing if the community it serves is underwater or on fire.” Write Gazley and her colleagues.
Africa would do well to heed that warning before the next storm hits.
This story has been developed from: Gazley, B., Cash, R., & Paarlberg, L. (2025). Are Community Philanthropic Organizations Planning for Climate Change? The Foundation Review, Vol. 17, Issue 1, pp. 33–44. DOI: 10.9707/1944-5660.1722
