1. “Use philanthropy as a catalyst, not a crutch.”
Avery Bang from Mulago pointed out that philanthropy’s role is catalytic. It won’t and can’t be forever. Philanthropy should fund R&D and early-stage experimentation, and then get out of the way.
“Deliver something valuable, price it smartly, find the right payer mix, and use philanthropy as a catalyst, not a crutch. And please—own what stage you’re at. Be honest about where you are. If you’re in R&D, say so. Then show us how you’ll move to scale.”
In saying that, Spring Impact’s recent research has found that philanthropy continues to be a critical payer at scale. Although many philanthropic funders expect their grantees to eventually find other major backers, in reality nonprofits normally need ongoing philanthropic support to sustain impact at scale. This obviously has big trade-offs, which is why the most successful nonprofits at scale usually have quite agile funding models, and have diversified their funding sources to manage volatility.
2. “It makes more economic sense” → Incentivising government to be your payer at scale.
“One thing to remember: the work you’re doing is the government’s responsibility. You’re not doing something extra – you’re contributing to what we should be doing.” — Hon. Twaambo, Member of Parliament, Zambia
Partnering with government can feel like slow-motion, but sometimes it is the only path to lasting impact.
What works when approaching government?
- 🤝 Build trust before paperwork
“Go into the relationship asking: how can we best support you so that you take over?” — Angel Chelwa, COO, Healthy Learners
Healthy Learners first focused on building informal relationships with individual champions in government, and treated the government as genuine partners, on the same level.
- 📈 Root your case for partnership in cost and long-term value:
Be clear in your value proposition: for the government, it can be a lot more costly if they DON’T invest in your solution.
“The cost of illness — in terms of absenteeism and the medical cost when learners fall ill — is actually much higher. It’s cheaper to invest in a healthcare intervention upfront. That’s the argument we’re making to our government: it’s preventive. It makes more economic sense to build small health rooms in schools, using existing government infrastructure, than to deal with children getting sick and going to hospitals.” — Hon. Twaambo, Member of Parliament, Zambia
❗ But what happens when the government is not willing or able to engage? Many audience members rightly highlighted that partnering with governments isn’t possible everywhere—some governments are too bureaucratic or don’t have enough budget, or are outright hostile to certain issues (e.g. LGBTQ+ rights).
So whether or not the government can be a payer at scale will remain highly context-dependent.
3. “Cheap enough for the payer” ≠ cheap in value
Mulago emphasised the need to design a solution that matches what your ideal payer—government, user, or other—can fund without compromising outcomes. “You have to find a price point that’s as close to market reality as possible”.
❗ As a funder from the audience pointed out “The best solution might not be the cheapest.” Price alone should not define value; and both nonprofits and funders need to be careful to avoid a a race to the bottom for the lowest price point.
VisionSpring “moved from a handout model to a handshake model”. Charing end-users even 10 cents for glasses means they hold VisionSpring to account. And also helps the organisation to ensure sustainable delivery.
That said, pricing strategies must be contextual and flexible, to ensure ongoing affordability even for the poorest.
4. Transitioning to other doers and payers isn’t the end of the journey
The ideal is; secure a payer, hand over delivery to partners, step back. But this rarely happens. Often even well-equipped partners need long-term support and few are willing or able to fund that role. This leaves nonprofits stuck: still deeply involved, but without a clear funding path.
Overcoming this barrier needs a relentless pursuit of impact and a fair amount of flexibility.
“We’ve had successes and failures. But we keep iterating. You can’t get arrogant about your solution. The moment you think, ‘This is the way,’ you hit a dead end. Instead, we keep evolving — finding new doers, new payers, new ways to work.” — Anshu Taneja, VisionSpring
The path may not be linear, but it’s there. This is where philanthropy can play a vital role: helping nonprofits stay the course, even after others take the lead.
——
In this post-aid moment, we’re being called to rethink what fuels scale. The key question isn’t just “how do we scale with limited resources?” It’s: How do we centre sustainability and community ownership in everything we design?
“There’s no one-size-fits-all. The key is humility—and a relentless focus on impact.” — Anshu Taneja, VisionSpring
|
