Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on March 11, 2025.
For decades, philanthropy has relied on a network of elite philanthropic advisors — large consulting firms, intermediaries, donor advisors and legacy institutions — to shape strategies, allocate resources, guide critical leadership and management decisions, and direct investments in social change. Over that period, these firms have shaped philanthropy and nonprofit organizations in their image.
This model is no longer fit for purpose.
Civic and human rights organizations are struggling to sustain themselves and the political landscape has shifted in ways that have left many mission-driven organizations without the support or agility they need to respond effectively.
Meanwhile, some of the very institutions entrusted with guiding philanthropic strategy have struggled to meet the moment. With massively engorged operating budgets and shrinking margins, they remain tethered to outdated models — prioritizing process over impact, emphasizing top-down decision-making over community-led solutions, and favoring risk-averse funding structures that do not meet the needs of dynamic movements. All the while, they hemorrhage staff, price their work outside the budget range of all but the most well-endowed nonprofits, and reinforce barriers to funder access through sanctioned gatekeeping and favoritism. In addition to being a management shortcoming and a risk to their reputations, this is a structural failure.
But we also see glimpses of a better way. A new Center for Effective Philanthropy (CEP) report on MacKenzie Scott’s gifts highlights how unrestricted, trust-based giving has significantly strengthened nonprofit sustainability, proving that it’s possible to achieve large-scale impact that lasts long beyond a single grant. It begins when funders move beyond outdated, bureaucratic constraints and work quickly and nimbly with streamlined and audacious teams, community and organizational partners, and leaner and more adaptive external advisors and firms.
A more effective model
This country’s growing frustration with philanthropy and our advisory complex is not irrational — it is, in many ways, valid. People have seen leaders in our field more comfortable in Berlin, Germany, and Paris, France, than in Berlin, New York, or Paris, Tennessee.
Too often, our leaders, advisors, and consultants prioritize “radical listening tours” with heads of state, Fortune 500 CEOs and tech entrepreneurs, yet shirk from community and staff town halls or one-on-one discussions with donors and program stakeholders. This is one of the clearest examples of the philanthropic advisory sector’s misplaced priorities. If we want to rebuild trust in this sector, we must be physically and emotionally present where change happens, not just where it is performatively discussed.
The future of philanthropy, and social impact advisory, must be built on models that are more agile, community driven, and directly accountable to those leading change. We cannot build trust in communities where we are absent. We cannot focus support where it is merely seen but not felt. Listening, proximity, and social impact cannot be buzzwords or thought exercises — they must be lived, experienced and directly practiced.
To meet this moment, philanthropy must be willing to fund and work with people who, at least initially, resent, fear, or outright reject our sector. If you’re not having difficult conversations or receiving critical feedback from time to time, you’re not being as impactful as you could be. Deep systemic change is not possible without addressing the erosion of trust that has, in part, fueled the rise of corrosive political and cultural forces. That work is not comfortable, and it does not fit neatly into the frameworks of elite institutions — but it is essential.
To be fair, not all philanthropic advisors are clinging to outdated structures. Some are evolving toward approaches that are more responsive, flexible and accountable to communities. While these are exceptions rather than the norm, they offer a glimpse of what’s possible when philanthropy recognizes that proximity to power should not determine access to resources. The lesson here isn’t that engaging intermediaries and large consulting firms can never work — it’s that their role must fundamentally change. If they are not actively dismantling bureaucracy, decentralizing decision-making, and prioritizing trust, they are part of the problem. Our job is to move the money and do the most good for as many people as possible as quickly as possible. If your consultants or advisors feel differently, that is telling.
A shift away from traditional advisors doesn’t mean eliminating all structure — it means reimagining how philanthropy flows. What if, instead of handing resources to blue-chip consulting firms, funders invested directly in regional grassroots networks that already have deep trust in their communities? What if large philanthropies made it standard practice to distribute funds through movement-led pooled funds rather than top-down institutions?
We are already seeing this work in real time. Some funders have begun embedding advisory councils made up of activists and organizers, ensuring that those shaping grant decisions are the same people impacted by them. Others are moving away from rigid RFP processes altogether, opting for proactive, trust-based giving models that center relationships over paperwork.
Evolve or step aside
The old system is not going to deliver us out of the realities we now face. The philanthropic infrastructure that helped shape past strategies is ill-equipped to navigate a world where misinformation is rampant, institutions are distrusted, and the forces of reactionary politics are well funded and strategically nimble.
It will instead take courageous, honest and radically vulnerable approaches that are fundamentally incompatible with elite, blue-chip advisory firms and management consultants. In the same way that smaller, more agile nonprofits, grassroots campaigns and targeted funder collaboratives are delivering outsized impact, the same must be true for advisory and impact consulting firms. Growth for growth’s sake is over. Clients have realized that excessive costs are not delivering excessive impact. The firms that will define the future are those that prioritize partnership over process, impact over infrastructure, and trust over transactions.
Through my work at KM Strategies Group, I’ve seen firsthand what happens when funders move beyond bureaucracy and embrace more dynamic strategies. A foundation we partnered with streamlined its fellowship application process and moved from an invitation-only model to a public call with a dedicated digital marketing budget focused on targeting impacted groups and reaching emerging leaders crafting solutions to improve their communities. These combined strategic changes reduced application burdens, shifted decision-making power to grantee partners, and fundamentally transformed their portfolio. Within a year, they saw increased impact, stronger relationships and the most diverse — at every level — fellowship cohort in the organization’s history.
The shift toward a more agile, movement-centered philanthropy isn’t theoretical — it’s already happening. And while many funders are eager to move in this direction, they need partners who can help them navigate this transition with clarity, strategy and impact. These are the conversations we need to be having — not about how to sustain old models, but how to build new ones that work.
The most effective strategies are those designed with — not for — the communities they serve. Social impact must be dynamic, responsive and embedded in broader cultural and political landscapes.
This approach requires a shift in mindset and practice:
Invest in movements, not just organizations. Philanthropy must move beyond short-term funding cycles and invest in the long-term sustainability of movements that create systemic change. When philanthropy trusts communities and follows the leadership of those closest to the work — without relying solely on elite advisors and management consultants — movements thrive.
Some funders have already begun charting a different path. The Solidaire Network, for example, directs resources straight to front-line social justice movements, bypassing traditional grantmaking delays and allowing communities to determine their own priorities. The Libra Foundation has embraced unrestricted, long-term funding as a way to strengthen grassroots organizations, rather than forcing them into cycles of scarcity and survival. Indigenous Women Rising has built a funding model centered on Indigenous leadership and sovereignty, ensuring resources are not just available but accessible in ways that honor lived experience.
We’re also seeing how direct, no-strings-attached funding for individuals — not just organizations — is proving to be an effective model. The David Prize, an initiative based in New York City, exemplifies this approach by giving $200,000 to five visionary changemakers each year, without requiring them to report back on metrics, outcomes or impact narratives. The logic is simple: New Yorkers closest to the city’s biggest challenges are also the ones most capable of solving them. Rather than forcing them to navigate layers of bureaucracy, The David Prize trusts them to act.
Prioritize agility and speed. The most effective impact strategies are not those that take years to develop, but those that are responsive to emerging challenges and opportunities. Philanthropy must be structured to move resources efficiently, reducing administrative burdens and increasing flexibility.
Fund like it matters (because it does!) Large, unrestricted, trust-based investments — like those studied in CEP’s latest research on MacKenzie Scott’s giving — have strengthened nonprofit financial health, expanded community impact, and increased leadership confidence. Nearly 90% of Scott’s grantees reported improved long-term sustainability, with no evidence of the “funding cliffs” traditional philanthropy often fears.
Bridge the gap between philanthropy and advocacy. Funding alone does not create change — power does. Philanthropic capital must be deployed in ways that strengthen the ability of organizations to advocate, organize and influence public policy.
Reduce transactionality, favoritism and gatekeeping. Hire advisors who are just as committed to getting funding and support for their nonprofit clients as they are to ensuring your giving is strategic and makes an impact. The two are not mutually exclusive; in fact, any one-way strategy is only half a strategy, because it doesn’t realize that philanthropy and social impact move at the speed of trust. Trust requires relationship-building, and intermediary advisors and funders are uniquely positioned to strengthen or weaken relationships. It’s time to hire advisors who strengthen them.
Embed strategy in lived experience. The best insights come from those closest to the work. Philanthropy must prioritize community-led solutions and ensure that the voices of those most affected by social challenges are central to decision-making.
Be transparent, courageous, direct and vulnerable in your messaging. The language you use in your communications and storytelling, as well as in your day-to-day work with partners, clients and grantees, says a lot about you, your vision and how you show up as a partner.
A call to action
The consulting firms, donor advisors and legacy institutions that shaped past approaches are not built for this moment — they are built for their own self-preservation.
We need a different kind of philanthropic advisory consulting — one that is unapologetically embedded in communities, unafraid to engage with skeptics, and willing to fund movements and advocacy, not just convenings or endowed chairs. If philanthropy continues to invest in the same advisors, frameworks and top-down models that got us here, we will lose — not just influence, but emerging leaders, innovative ideas, and ultimately, the ability to shape a future where justice, democracy and equity stand a chance.
So fund boldly. Move quickly. Lower ladders instead of raising the drawbridge. Trust leaders on the ground. And above all, stop paying for the same bad advice.
Kindred Motes is founder and managing director of KM Strategies Group, a social impact advisory consultancy, and the co-founder of The Etolia Fund. He previously held senior positions at The Tow Foundation and Wallace Global Fund.
