Four months into the war in Ukraine, foundations and nonprofits providing help amid the worst refugee crisis in Europe since World War II find themselves in a challenging position: determining how best to address a significant humanitarian need while maintaining their level of support to organizations emerging from a global pandemic.

While the donor public has been responsive to the needs of refugees, the invasion’s ramifications on democracy and the global economy augur changes on the horizon for foundations and nonprofits alike, both in how they respond to such challenges and in how they respond to their partners.

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, Candid has collected publicly available data reflecting philanthropic and charitable funding provided in response to the crisis. To date, 992 grants totaling nearly $1.23 billion have been awarded, as well as an additional 176 pledges worth more than $697 million.

And yet, with the war’s end nowhere in sight, the pace of giving appears to have plateaued, with only a fraction of new funding announced in May and June.

According to  the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, the $1.92 billion pledged or received to address the war in Ukraine is on par with what was raised after the 2010 earthquake in Haiti (approximately $1.8 billion in 2021 dollars) and the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami ($2.18 billion in 2021 dollars).

While early funding indicates a similar pace in total contributions, philanthropy’s response to recent natural disasters—extreme, but relatively short-lived hardship and displacement—may not be the right frame of reference for what comes next for Ukraine and the world.

The war in Ukraine already has affected the global economy with predictions that its impact will be long-lasting regardless of the outcome. If the ongoing conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan are any indication, the need for international support and coordination will require years if not decades of sustained attention.

In these early days of the conflict in Ukraine, looking at how philanthropic organizations are prioritizing their efforts, assessing needs, and responding in real time, we can start to see what a sustained philanthropic response may look like, even as the crisis continues.

And while we may lack a clear road map for Ukraine, many organizations in the philanthropic sector are leaning on their experience in adapting and responding to entirely new challenges as well as in reinforcing long-term efforts in the face of changing circumstances.

Assault on democracy

Within days of Russia’s invasion, Open Society Foundations (OSF) launched the Ukraine Democracy Fund “to respond to Putin’s assault on democracy,” said Viorel Ursu, division director of the Europe and Eurasia program at OSF. “Its initial priorities are to support Ukrainian civil society groups inside and outside the country, foster international solidarity with Ukraine, and protect displaced persons in and from the country.”

According to OSF, the fund is operating with a budget of more than $43 million, including $25 million from the foundation and nearly $19 million from other funders to date. So far, OSF has approved more than $13 million in grants, a sizable portion of which will support the ongoing functioning of Ukrainian civil society groups, including those that have had to relocate outside the country. In addition, the funding will support efforts to document war crimes and ensure accountability and target gaps in efforts to protect refugees and internally displaced people.

“This is the most difficult kind of grantmaking: providing resources in a fast-changing war environment,” said Ursu.

The war is not only about defending Ukraine against Russian aggressions, but “also a war of ideas and values,” he added. “We felt compelled to act to resist and respond to Putin’s assault on democracy....Whatever the Kremlin might say, it is clear that what Putin is really afraid of is a free and flourishing open society on his doorstep.”

Among the outside funders supporting OSF’s Ukraine Democracy Fund was the Ford Foundation, which allocated $1 million. According to Salih Booker, senior program officer of international programs at the Ford Foundation, it also awarded $1 million to the Ukraine Emergency Response Fund of the International Rescue Committee (IRC), $250,000 to the Metropolitan Opera for the Ukrainian Freedom Tour and $500,000 to Freedom House for an ongoing program called Lifeline, which was already helping to support embattled activists and will continue to do so amid the ongoing war.

The grants are atypical for the foundation, which focuses on addressing root causes of systemic problems, especially regarding inequality. “This is the single largest humanitarian crisis that Europe has seen since World War II,” Booker explained. “We felt it was important for Ford to show its support and solidarity with others in the philanthropic community.”

Whether the war in Ukraine will lead the foundation to direct more energy and resources in Europe remains to be seen. It continues to support Europe-focused institutions such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and various think tanks including the Paris Peace Forum in France and Chatham House in the United Kingdom.

Ford’s funding is not taking away from any of its programs, Booker added. “A number of programs have made voluntary contributions in order to support some of these emergency grants,” he said. “That is one of the challenges when you have humanitarian emergencies. These are often unforeseen, unpredictable, and obviously off-budget.”

Yet, the conflict in Ukraine also leads into the ongoing discussion within the humanitarian community about how to maintain adequate focus on multiple crises. “How is it going to impact the already underfunded efforts in Syria, in Yemen, in Nigeria, in Sudan, in Myanmar…tens of millions of people who are in dire need,” he said.

European philanthropic response

According to data collected by Candid, corporations, foundations, nonprofits, and individuals from European countries have awarded or committed $631 million to assist Ukraine war relief efforts—including the donation of prize money by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Dmitry Muratov and the charity auction of his Nobel Prize medal.

Oak Foundation in Switzerland has allocated $23 million to provide humanitarian relief, mostly to nonprofit organizations operating in Ukraine but also in neighboring countries to which refugees fled. “While Oak is not typically a humanitarian funder, our trustees feel compelled to respond to this situation, as they have done with other global disasters before in Afghanistan, Yemen, and Haiti,” said foundation president Douglas Griffiths.

Long engaged in a range of efforts around response and recovery to natural disasters, Fondation de France (FDF) has turned that expertise into a template for engaging donors and partner foundations across Europe. It allocates humanitarian aid for both internally displaced persons and refugees and hosting families—including transportation and shelter, food and non-food distribution, and psychological and psychosocial support—as well as human rights protection, such as fighting human trafficking and supporting rights to information.

Within days of the Russian invasion, FDF launched a fundraising campaign, which raised more than €13.5 million ($14.24 million) by mid-May. “With this money, we have decided to work in Ukraine and in neighboring countries; not in France at this stage to avoid double standards,” said Karine Meaux, emergencies and international solidarity head of unit at FDF.

“Our priority is always given to local or locally based associations. In the early days, we funded French NGOs that knew the areas well, to allow them to adapt before receiving more massive institutional funding,” said Meaux. “Since then, thanks to the networks of European foundations and the foundations under our aegis and to the contacts provided by NGOs and embassies, we have supported almost exclusively local associations and foundations in the target countries.” FDF has already committed $1.78 million.

According to FDF, this funding enabled grantees to adapt their work. “Our funds are allocated on the basis of concrete projects,” Meaux explained. “But the partners have large freedom to adjust their actions according to the evolution of the context, and they are always very grateful for that.” For example, the funds can be used to cover anything that is not covered by more institutional donors, including capacity-building actions.

“In terms of impact, several partners have told us that they have been able to increase the number of families benefiting from their aid, to go to more isolated areas (which therefore require more resources), to recruit staff because the first few weeks were very exhausting for everyone.”

While FDF regularly responds to major disasters, it rarely plays a role in times of conflict. “However, the proximity of this war, the willingness of our citizens to support people fleeing Ukraine, and our capacity to act, increased by the cooperation of European foundations, has been decisive,” she explained. “We also have a long-term partnership with the [state-funded] French Development Agency, which allowed us to act in the long term after the earthquake in Haiti, the earthquake in Nepal, and the explosion in Beirut, [Lebanon]. This partnership is being implemented in Moldova this time.”

Planning for and engaging with refugees

While the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA) is based in the United States, its efforts are carried out across the world. As of the end of June, Jewish Federations have collectively raised more than $66 million since the fighting began, supporting refugees inside Ukraine and neighboring countries as well as helping relocate—in coordination with its many partners—as many as 80,500 Jewish and other refugees.

“We want to make sure the communities are healthy, that they’re safe, that they’re welcoming and inclusive, that they’re educated and engaged, that they’re involved in the broader community, that they’re connected to Israel and the global Jewish people, and so our role in the community is to help bring to light what the needs are,” said JFNA president and CEO Eric Fingerhut. “That’s the extra buses, the extra planes, the extra security, the extra everything that’s been needed during the course of the emergency. But we’re in this business year-round, not just when there’s an emergency.”

The Conrad N. Hilton Foundation concentrates its efforts on ensuring healthy early childhood development and sustainable livelihoods for youth. To address the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, as it does for other such crises, the foundation sources funds exclusively through its Disaster Relief and Recovery portfolio, so the allocation does not affect funding levels for its other strategies.

According to the foundation, its allocation toward disasters has increased significantly in recent years, which will allow the foundation to respond not only to the situation in Ukraine but to other crises around the world and in the U.S.

“At the scale of the immediate crisis, the Hilton Foundation made this commitment with strong backing from our board of directors and senior staff,” said a foundation spokesperson. “Our disaster relief and recovery portfolio is set up to help alleviate the suffering caused by crises around the globe through both immediate response and longer-term recovery funding. Given the ramifications of mass displacement seen not only within Ukraine but in its neighboring countries, this initial response package will be followed by a second round of funding that is currently being developed.”

To date, the foundation's support includes grants to Catholic Relief Services, HelpAge USA, International Union of Superiors General, and Project HOPE.

Driven by employee interest and activism in Europe, Levi Strauss & Co. engages in refugee support, both from the company and the Levi Strauss Foundation. Prior to the current crisis, the company established a three-part program, focused mostly on Europe, to assist organizations that are providing critical services and assistance to refugees through philanthropic grants, employee volunteer hours, and product donations. Not long after the start of the war, the company and foundation committed more than $300,000 to the IRC and CARE.

“In response to the conflict in Ukraine, we built on this model to provide grants and opportunities for employees to engage globally,” said Phil Zabriskie, director of impact and global reputation at Levi Strauss and Co. “We leaned on grantee partners to guide us to appropriate action, ensuring that philanthropic support went where it was needed most, product donations weren’t superfluous and were meeting a direct need, and that employees who felt they wanted to do more were given meaningful and actionable opportunities to do so, including by making donations that the company would match.”

While most Ukraine-related philanthropy is targeted for immediate direct relief overseas, Richard King Mellon Foundation (RKMF) is looking at how the growing refugee crisis may affect the Pittsburgh region, historically one of the largest Ukrainian communities in the U.S. (To date, the UNHCR reports eight million border crossings from Ukraine, mostly women and children, since February 24, 2022, and more than 5.64 million individual refugees from Ukraine recorded across Europe.)

With no portfolio related specifically to disaster relief, the foundation typically responds to humanitarian crises by turning to its long-term local partners to maximize impact. After the Russian invasion, RKMF reached out to the Holy Family Institute of Pittsburgh—known for helping children in wartime and humanitarian crises like the 2020 earthquake in Haiti, also in collaboration with RKMF—to convene like-minded local groups and address how best they could leverage existing knowledge to mitigate the anticipated refugee crisis.

“We find that we don’t have the relationships to make good decisions about where we can award grant funding [overseas],” said RKMF director Sam Reiman. “Our partners are especially clear on exactly what they’re going to do, how they're going to do it, and for how many people…[making this] an opportunity for us to do something in our own backyard that still enables us to be supportive and to help Ukrainians who are being displaced by the war.”

Thus far, the foundation has funded four organizations—Catholic Charities of Pittsburgh, Hello Neighbor, Jewish Family and Community Services of Pittsburgh, and Holy Family Institute—for a total of $500,000 to prepare for an anticipated 274 refugees.

Looking at RKMF’s locally focused effort as a test case for future action, Reiman said, “you could imagine if other cities were to think ‘perhaps we could do something similar,’ and if all of that were in place before people just start arriving—and we could make that seamless—then I think that’s an ideal outcome.”

Partnership and cooperation

As the war in Ukraine continues—and hopes for a quick end to hostilities fade—philanthropic organizations are beginning to look to the long-term, reassessing their early efforts, and planning for an unclear future. Many organizations are leaning on their recent experiences to reaffirm their commitments and focus.

For the Ford Foundation, the crisis in Ukraine has exposed the shortcomings of international cooperation. “Whether it’s climate change or COVID, or extreme poverty or inequality, we need to fix the international system,” he said. “We need to reimagine global governance in a way that’s more effective [and] more inclusive.”

To that end, the Ford Foundation has launched an international cooperation and global governance program, which Booker leads. “This represents a new effort by the foundation to return to grantmaking in the field of global governance in recognition of the fact that the problems every society faces in the world today are not problems that can be solved on a national basis.”

The program will work to address the need for greater international cooperation and more effective global governance. “We see our work related to Ukraine as part of this effort to more effectively build systems that allow countries to participate in international cooperation in a way that is sustainable and effective....We cannot solve COVID in any single country, and we cannot solve violent conflict without a greater global governance and international cooperation effort.”

“How we react in real time to things happening on the ground now is an extension of how the foundation operated during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, said RKMF's Reiman. The foundation intends to keep its focus on supporting plans for local refugee settlement and is prepared to make additional investments. “Because we know that these are things that impact the people that live in the community, we’re going to continue to do that work... If we see that there are ways for even more refugees to find their way to Pittsburgh, then we would certainly go back to our board and have that conversation.”

Already, Oak Foundation has more than doubled its Ukraine-related commitments from $10.75 million in March to a total of $23 million in June.

JFNA is now focusing on the next six months and how to transition to long-term support such as child care, education, and relocation, while remaining attuned to immediate needs and the possible escalation of the war and its impact on neighboring countries. “There are ongoing humanitarian needs that are less in the headlines, but very, very real because of the amount of displacement and rising prices, lack of health care, lack of economic activity,” said JFNA’s Fingerhut. “Our sense is that we need to really stay focused on displaced persons and refugees where they are, even some who never left home, but are being deprived of necessities.”

Even as hostilities began, OSF was planning to address the war’s impact. Its early tranche of grants included support to Mnemonic, a human rights group, to create an archive that will help preserve and verify information about alleged war crimes, raise international public attention, and strengthen international solidarity.

In the Ukraine crisis, as in philanthropy broadly, longstanding relationships, trust, and communication between funders and their nonprofit partners continue to make the humanitarian response to the war possible. However varied the approach, none of the work could be done from San Francisco, New York, or Paris; instead, it requires people on the ground clarifying needs and providing crucial information.

Levi Strauss Foundation “leaned on grantee partners to guide us to appropriate action, ensuring that philanthropic support went where it was needed most,” said Zabriskie. So too, FDF gauged its response through its long-term collaboration in Moldova with the French Development Agency.

“Inasmuch as [RKMF] was proactive in connecting with our partners, this work is impossible without them,” said Reiman. “If not for their willingness, creativity, and resourcefulness, we wouldn't be having this conversation.”

Ford views the war as the tip of the spear in a continuing global challenge—not just a discrete military conflict—that will leave social, economic, and political aftershocks for years to come. “As we’ve seen, it’s having this enormous economic impact on food prices and fuel prices that are going to have a ripple effect—for the entire economic recovery worldwide, said Booker.”

For JFNA, an ongoing needs assessment process, transparency, and open communication with donors and partners is essential, particularly as the need for new funding emerges. Jewish Federations recently projected $99 million in additional needs for their partner organizations in Ukraine through the end of 2022—a portion, of which has already been raised in commitments or funds not yet allocated. “I have no reason to believe that people who've given already are not going to continue to be committed to these humanitarian needs,” said Fingerhut. “Our job is to help with research and analysis and present [donors] with the information, and I have every confidence that people will respond.”

The full assessment of philanthropy's response to the war in Ukraine will only come years from now. And as the war in Ukraine continues and as media and public attention fades, the ongoing challenge will be to understand and adapt to the changing humanitarian needs. But one early conclusion is certain: the philanthropic impulse to cooperate, to listen to partners and communities, to reach for impact, and to act on lessons learned is as vital in Ukraine as it is in confronting the endemic domestic challenges of our time.

Matt Sinclair is editor, and Daniel X Matz, contributing editor, at Philanthropy News Digest.

Find more articles in Philanthropy News Digest about  philanthropy’s response to the war in Ukraine.

Find more updates and resources on Candid’s special issue page on the philanthropic response to the war in Ukraine.

(Photo credit: Getty Images/Joel Carillet)