Redistributing Power: Making the Case for Community Philanthropy

Let communities lead. Then, follow their lead.

The Illusion of Equity

Across the philanthropic sector, a troubling pattern continues: large, well-resourced nonprofits thrive, while smaller, community-rooted organizations (especially those led by and for BIPOC communities) struggle to survive. These disparities are not just financial; they are structural, embedded in a system that rewards stature over proximity to community needs. Despite being closer to the ground and more responsive to real-time needs, these smaller organizations are routinely overlooked, underfunded, or burdened by restrictive grants that inhibit rather than empower.

Transformational giving isn’t about charity. It’s about shifting power. It’s one of the ways we can begin to close the persistent funding gaps between large, often white-led, (inter)nationally recognized institutions and smaller, community-based organizations.

For all the talk about equity in philanthropy, too many funders are unwilling to give up control. Too many cling to the illusion that funding is inherently benevolent, even when it flows through structures designed to gatekeep, micromanage, and ultimately disempower the very communities they claim to support. Philanthropy, as it operates today, often reinforces the inequities it seeks to address.

A Grant Seeker’s View

Though I’ve only worked on the grant-seeking side of the equation, I've spent enough time in these spaces—collaborating with organizations, managing communication strategies, and participating in conversations that shape narratives and priorities—to know that something feels off.

I’ve witnessed community leaders feeling tokenized, grassroots organizations jumping through bureaucratic hoops to prove their worth, and funders more concerned with their image than genuine impact. Communities experience an apparent sense of alienation when funding decisions are made about them without them.

And my biggest takeaway from all this is that how we seek funding isn’t always about truth-telling. It’s often about translation. We tell stories to funders that are crafted for philanthropic appeal, not necessarily the stories that are the most honest or urgent. Those disconnects have always stayed with me. It raises a critical question: if our narratives must be bent to secure resources, are funders really shifting power or just repackaging it?

The Systemic Barriers to Community Power

Across the sector, systemic barriers limit what is possible for grassroots and community-led organizations. Competitive grant cycles force nonprofits into scarcity mindsets. Hypertechnical application processes favor well-resourced, often white-led, institutions. Intermediaries are layered into every step, distancing funders from the people closest to the problems. Even when funders say they want community input, it rarely translates to shared decision-making or true partnership.

Kris Putnam-Walkerly calls this out plainly in her book Delusional Altruism:

Philanthropists must stop making decisions in a vacuum and instead center the expertise of those most affected.

She identifies the many ways funders sabotage their own impact through bureaucracy, fear of failure, and a deep discomfort with risk. These behaviors are not neutral. They have consequences. They systematically exclude those without the capacity, language, or connections to navigate elite philanthropic spaces.

Redistributing Power with Community Philanthropy

The alternative isn’t just better outreach or simplified grant portals. It’s a radical shift in thinking about who holds power and why.

Community philanthropy offers a path forward. As defined in the GrantCraft paper, How Community Philanthropy Shifts Power: What Donors Can Do to Help Make That Happen, it is a practice rooted in trust, shared decision-making, and local resource mobilization. It turns passive beneficiaries into active co-investors. It prioritizes relationships over transactions and redefines accountability as mutual rather than one-directional.

Community philanthropy is about building power from the ground up. It starts with the belief that communities have the knowledge, tools, and solutions needed to address their challenges. It sees community members not as charity recipients but as decision-makers, organizers, and resource stewards. Philanthropy's role in supporting community philanthropy is not to direct the work but to resource it with humility. This means providing long-term, flexible funding, stepping back from decision-making, and using institutional influence to shift norms and open doors. When done well, philanthropy becomes a platform for redistributing power, not just money.

Of course, this kind of letting go can feel risky. As Putnam-Walkerly notes, many funders operate from a scarcity mindset, even when surrounded by abundance. They fear making the wrong choice or losing credibility. However, the deeper risk lies in maintaining the status quo. In clinging to control, philanthropy often misses the opportunity for change.

What does community philanthropy look like in practice?

It looks like participatory grantmaking, where communities set funding priorities and decide where dollars go. It looks like multi-year, unrestricted grants that allow local organizations to invest in what they know matters. It looks like funding leadership development, storytelling, and organizing. It looks like funders building long-term relationships based on trust, not compliance.

There are so many inspiring examples of organizations putting these frameworks into practice:

• The Brooklyn Community Foundation uses a participatory approach, giving local residents power over grant decisions through its Brooklyn Insights and Spark Prize initiatives.

• The Akonadi Foundation in Oakland centers racial justice and community voice by supporting grassroots organizations led by and for people of color.

• The Foundation for Appalachian Kentucky uses local-led grantmaking to uplift rural communities, valuing lived experience over institutional status.

These models show what’s possible when funders don’t just invite community input; they center it.

The Internal Work Funders Must Do

Funders must ask themselves: How are we building authentic relationships with the communities we serve? Are our practices genuinely aligned with our stated values of equity and justice? What are we willing to change to redistribute power, not just resources?

Because giving money without giving power isn’t justice. It’s just another form of control.

The future of philanthropy must be shaped by those most impacted. We need to redistribute more than just wealth. We need to redistribute decision-making, trust, and control. Only then can philanthropy begin to live up to its promise of building a more just and equitable world.

Let communities lead. Then, follow their lead.

---