I’ve lost count of the number of people I’ve spoken with who are worried about funders closing their doors to focus on their own strategy. Whilst the practice is not brand new, the timing and number of Trusts taking this path feels… different.

Fundraisers and charities are at their wits end; worried about budget, morale and simply keeping the doors open. Planning has become ever more precarious, laced with the fear of further funding pauses.

Previously a (relatively) dependable branch of income, Trust fundraising has become an incredibly competitive space and success rates have fallen through the floor. Trusts temporarily closing their grant programmes adds to the challenging funding environment and knocks carefully mapped plans off course.

I’m sure that funders undertake a careful assessment of how a pause for deep strategic work will serve their charitable objectives. That they make the difficult decision of long-term benefit outweighing short-term costs. I don’t know how that calculation works or if it’s the right formula, but I am left wondering if the equation adds up to ‘pause for strategy’, why this isn’t a common option within grant streams?

I’ve been trying to recall a time I’ve seen a funder support a charity to pause for strategic development and nothing comes to mind. There may be examples out there, but I think it’s fair to say it’s not standard practice.

Perhaps because there’s the question of whether a charity would want to pause their work for an extended recalibration period. It would undoubtedly be a complicated process. But more complicated than what many teams are dealing with already? There are so many organisations that have struggled in vain to adapt to external or internal changes whilst still meeting expectations, needs, targets and undertaking ‘business as usual’ work. It’s a tall order by anyone’s standards. Which I assume is why funders are taking the ‘pause to plan’ approach.

Whilst it wouldn’t be appropriate for every organisation, I suspect there would be an appetite for either winding down to a strategic development pause or finding an altogether new way to really focus on how to have a meaningful impact.

It would take brave and bold leaders on both sides of the funding table to explore such an approach, but I can’t help thinking that it might be just the tonic for organisations trying to do so much with so little.