GRANT MAKING NERDS
Trouble in Acadia
Your program officer in charge of Acadia alerts you that the government has reintroduced the NGO law that was tabled in 2024. It is clear that this version of the NGO law is intended to restrict NGO activities and also limit their ability to get foreign funding by making it administratively difficult for NGOs to get their activities and funding sources approved. NGOs activities that “disrupt public order” will be punished. The government says that it has enough votes to pass the law next week.
The program officer wants to renew grants before the law comes into effect but is also concerned that the law would be used retroactively for investigations. Several of XYZ Foundation’s grantees are planning to organize to challenge the law and seek support from XYZ Foundation to continue this work. Others are concerned that raising the alarm will cause retribution from the government or destabilize their fragile balancing act
What are your next steps?
The NGO law is unjust and XYZ foundation should be part of the organizing efforts to postpone the law’s passage or amend it. There is enough funding for the next two years so you decide to renew grants to all grantees that are willing before the law comes into effect (even if it’s next week) and also increase support to those organizations seeking to challenge the law on the ground. The funding that XYZ receives for work in Acadia is very much tied to the ability of your grantees to organize and advance advocacy agendas – even though there is a risk that such organizing may run afoul of the government’s definition of “public order”, you are willing to move forward.
There is enough funding for the next two years, and you expect there will be more funding coming, so you want to keep funding in Acadia but want to take action after the law’s passage. You are happy that there are a couple of grantees that could meet the NGO law restrictions so you move forward with renewals for those grants. For grantees who may not be able to register, you have to consider what your other options are (including consultancy contracts or partnerships with more “mainstream” NGOs) but you are prepared to invest the resources into this because you want to do the things properly.
Your outside legal counsel is recommending that XYZ does not continue funding in Acadia because of the reintroduction of the NGO law means that transferring resources that are aligned with the letter and spirit of the law will be very difficult. You are hesitant to continue funding in such a difficult political context, especially recognizing that your grantees cannot be registered. The funding that XYZ receives for work in Acadia is tied to the ability of your grantees to organize and advance advocacy agendas that may run afoul of the government’s definition of “public order”.