In times of multiple and overlapping crises, prioritizing effective philanthropic governance can seem like a luxury. And yet, it is the work of philanthropic governance — the high-stakes decisions about foundation spending, strategy, time horizon and investments — that determines if and how a grantmaker is responsive to the needs of nonprofits and the communities they serve.
The question of effective and courageous governance is one I’ve thought a lot about, both as a board member and as an executive director partnering with a board. In my book, A New Era of Philanthropy, I argue that reimagined philanthropic governance is essential to forging a philanthropy that meets this moment. I draw on interviews with foundation CEOs and trustees and my own experience as a foundation and board leader to offer an approach to philanthropic governance that is responsive, proximate, accountable and transparent (much like the approach outlined in GEO’s publication, Toward Meaningful, Valuable, Equitable Governance).
What Is the Work of Governance in Times of Crisis?
Foundation trustees are stewards of philanthropic organizations charged with fiscal oversight, decisions about strategy, investments and spending — decisions that reverberate across nonprofit organizations, movements and communities. While we live in rapidly changing times, many of our governance defaults are slow-moving and focused on oversight rather than timely action toward mission. Many trustees live into their stewardship role by focusing on oversight and risk reduction. Board meetings are filled with agenda items like reviewing impact reports, approving grants, tracking spending and updates about the foundation’s endowment returns. The implicit questions are answered with “yes” or “no.” Is our budget balanced? Are we on track with compliance activities? Do we approve these grants?
The prioritizing of oversight over action toward mission in our governance work explains in part why the philanthropic sector has been so slow to pivot and meet emerging needs.
The prioritizing of oversight over action toward mission in our governance work explains in part why the philanthropic sector has been so slow to pivot and meet emerging needs. In 2025, when the nonprofit sector faced sudden and dramatic funding declines, the philanthropic sector was slow to respond, even as nonprofits struggled and some closed their doors. The Center for Effective Philanthropy’s 2026 report, A Sector in Crisis, found that 93% of nonprofit leaders were dissatisfied with philanthropy’s response and 69% experienced funding cuts. Foundations that eventually increased their payouts often did so six to nine months after the crisis began. Boards struggled to pivot and respond in a time of rapid change.
Responsive governance requires trustees to go beyond the yes and no questions and lean collectively into generative questions.
Oversight is important, and yet, in times of rapid change, responsive governance requires trustees to go beyond the yes and no questions and lean collectively into generative questions — ones that illuminate purpose, clarify values, build shared understanding and position the foundation to act boldly in response to the urgency of the moment.
Below are seven courageous questions that will position boards for timely action and have the potential to transform how the philanthropic sector works.
Seven Questions for More Effective Philanthropic Governance in a New Era
1. What Do We Stand For? (Values as Operating Instructions)
Organizational values are more than words on our websites. They are the operating instructions that guide our decision-making, providing guardrails and inspiration. When I was the executive director of a private foundation, we began our board meetings by reading our values and reflecting on what they meant in the moment. In this time of attacks on our democracy, it is important for boards to revisit their values and ask what these values demand of us at this moment. For example, how might we embody a value of courage or solidarity in our spending decisions? If our values are under attack, how might we embody and defend them, using our philanthropic capital and voice?
Generative question for trustees: What are our institutional values and where are they being tested? How are we living into our values in our decision-making?
2. How Did We Get Here? (Political Education and Meaning-Making)
Governing effectively requires us to understand the broader context for the challenges we seek to address. The current landscape is shaped by political, historical and social forces — and every board meeting should include time for understanding these forces. Governance must include regular reflection on the roots of current issues, the structures and systems that sustain them and how change happens. A board culture that embraces learning can help ground trustees in an understanding of how we got here so that they can make more strategic decisions.
Generative question for trustees: What are the root causes of the challenges we seek to address, and how does change happen in the ecosystems we fund?
3. What Is This Time? (Understanding the Stakes)
Different from “how did we get here?” is the question, “where are we now?” Every funding decision takes place within a specific social and political context. Too often, governance happens in a vacuum — removed from the urgency of the moment. Trustees must grasp the stakes of our current time. Are we in a moment of democratic erosion? Of mounting attacks on trusted community institutions? Of accelerating climate collapse? Of hard-won civil rights and liberties being systematically rolled back? A nuanced awareness of the stakes in this moment can positively shape how trustees prioritize and act.
Generative question for trustees: What are the defining characteristics and consequences of this moment in time, and how should they inform our strategy, spending and governance?
4. What Are We Preserving, and What Are We Transforming? (Getting Clear on Purpose)
In A New Era of Philanthropy, I explore how Andrew Carnegie’s model of “gilded philanthropy” was designed to preserve rather than transform social and economic systems. This blueprint lives on today in many foundations, embedded in default governance behaviors that prioritize preservation of capital, of legacy and of the institution itself. Trustees today must scrutinize these tendencies and examine what they are holding tightly (e.g. endowment size, payout norms, investment returns) and ask themselves honestly what must be transformed in service of a more just future.
Generative question for trustees: How are we actively using our capital and power to transform the systems that shape how wealth and power are held?
5. What Risks Are We Willing to Take? What Are the Risks of Inaction? (Risk as Unavoidable in a Polycrisis)
Trustees often focus their efforts as fiduciaries on avoiding risks, while overlooking potentially bigger risks of inaction to their missions, nonprofit partners and communities. Risk is also relative, and today many nonprofits and communities are facing risks more dire than those facing most grantmakers. In these turbulent times, trustees should name the risks they are willing to take to realize their mission and identify the risks of institutional inaction.
Generative question for trustees: What are the risks of our actions and inaction? What is at the root of hesitations to embrace risk?
6. How Will We Be Remembered? (Legacy Beyond Perpetuity)
Too often, philanthropies define legacy narrowly as perpetuity — as if merely existing forever is the foundation’s ultimate goal, and the trustees’ highest responsibility. But the real legacy of a foundation is what its resources made possible. Legacy can be understood as how future generations will assess today’s decisions. Were trustees bold in the face of crisis? What guiding principles and values did they stand behind? Did they show up when it mattered most?
Generative question for trustees: How will our decisions today be remembered in 10, 20 or 50 years? What kind of ancestors are we being through our governance?
7. Are We Building the Deep Relationships That Brave Governance Requires? (If You Want to Go Far, Go Together)
Courageous governance requires a container of strong relationships. Too many boards avoid conflict or areas of disagreement and only move forward when there is full agreement and comfort. Governance benefits from strong relationships that can hold and withstand difficult conversations and discomfort. A board that has invested in building trust and connection among board members — as well as between board members, staff and the communities they serve — and has developed the muscles to grapple and move together when there is not a “right answer” is better able to respond to uncertain times.
Generative question for trustees: How might we cultivate the depth and quality of relationships among our trustees (and staff and grantees) that will allow for responsive action in uncertain times?
Investing Time for More Courageous and Responsive Decisions
Agenda items that will surface answers to these questions will vary and should be designed based on the cultures, norms and preferences of a particular board. Some boards will want to discuss these questions on their own or with staff, while others may invite outside speakers, bring in facilitators or develop reading lists to help deepen their understanding. In this new era of crisis and opportunity, trustees who intentionally repurpose their time to answer reflective, strategic and generative questions will dramatically enhance their impact and lay the groundwork for more courageous and responsive decision-making.
Dimple Abichandani is a leading voice on the future of philanthropy, advising foundations, donors and boards on how to meet this moment of democratic crisis and accelerating inequality. A philanthropic advisor, social justice lawyer and author of A New Era of Philanthropy, she works to unlock resources and solidarity toward a more just and sustainable future.
Dimple is grateful to GEO, Northern California Grantmakers and Philanthropy New York for their support of this article.