Topic: Strategy

Beyond the Map: Rethinking How We Invest in Rural Communities

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Rural communities across the U.S. are too often framed by what they lack rather than in terms of the deep assets, leadership, and innovation they already hold. They also face persistent gaps in philanthropic investment, infrastructure, and long-term capital, even as they are critical to the nation’s economic, cultural, and civic future

During a March 19 virtual Leader Roundtable, NationSwell, the Walton Family Foundation, the Delta Philanthropy Forum, and a great group of cross-sector leaders gathered to explore what effective, community-centered rural investment actually looks like in practice. Drawing on insights from the Mississippi-Arkansas Delta — a region that reflects both the challenges and the promise of rural America — the conversation highlighted how place-based strategies rooted in trust, listening, and long-term commitment can unlock opportunity.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Key takeaways:

Rural isn’t just a geography, it’s a cultural context. Rural communities are often discussed as sparse populations or hard-to-reach places, but in practice they function as distinct cultural ecosystems with their own histories, norms, and relationship structures. That shift in framing matters: Once rural is understood as a culture and context rather than a category, the equity implications become harder to ignore.

Let the people closest to the challenge shape the solution. Across the conversation, one principle kept resurfacing: the most durable ideas tend to come from the people already living and working in the place. Funders can play an important and catalytic role, but the work is strongest when capital flows from local wisdom rather than overriding it. Experimentation matters — but it matters most when communities help define what success looks like.

Redefine scale in percentage points, not raw volume. Traditional philanthropic metrics tend to privilege large urban markets because outputs are easier to maximize there, but in rural communities, impact often shows up more meaningfully as share of need met, not total number served. A smaller absolute number can represent a far deeper level of transformation.

Partner with rural communities as “test kitchens”, but also fund them beyond the pilot. Rural places can serve as ideal proving grounds for innovation because interventions can be tested at smaller scale, with lower upfront capital and clearer community feedback loops. But too often, philanthropy treats rural communities as places to experiment on rather than places to invest with. If a model works in a rural context, it may be more transferable than assumed — but only if funders stay long enough to support sustainability.

Invest in ecosystems rather than isolated projects. In rural regions, no single town or institution exists in a vacuum. What happens in one community often creates ripple effects across neighboring towns and regional networks, meaning that effective place-based investment requires thinking beyond individual grants or municipalities and designing for coordination across a broader ecosystem.

Pair data with lived experience to understand what a region actually needs. Quantitative indicators can identify where opportunity gaps exist, but can’t fully explain how those gaps are experienced on the ground. Stronger investment decisions emerge when funders use data as a starting point, then pressure-test it through direct conversation with local residents, practitioners, and community leaders. In rural communities especially, context is often the difference between a good strategy and a misfire.

Remove match requirements and other structural barriers that quietly exclude rural communities. Many rural and rural BIPOC communities are shut out not because they lack ideas or leadership, but because they lack the upfront capital required to meet standard philanthropic or public-sector thresholds. One-to-one matches often reproduce inequity under the guise of rigor; if funders want different outcomes, they need to revisit the rules that determine who can even get in the door.

Make communities of choice, not just communities of need. The goal is not simply to mitigate decline or address deprivation, but to build places where people want to stay, return, and invest their lives. That means activating local assets — including culture, recreation, history, civic pride, etc. — alongside economic fundamentals. Place-based investment becomes more durable when it supports belonging and aspiration, not just service delivery.

Rural communities of color sit at the sharpest edge of underinvestment. The most severe inequities often emerge where rural geography and race intersect. Rural Black communities, tribal communities, and colonias are places where the funding gap is especially stark, despite persistent poverty and strong local leadership. Any serious conversation about equitable place-based investment must confront that layered exclusion directly.

Resiliency and Innovation in Philanthropy

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

A year after sweeping federal funding cuts and mounting political pressure on equity- and justice-focused work, many funders are reexamining how to stay effective and principled in an increasingly constrained and polarized environment—while also stepping up to fill the void left by government withdrawal.

On March 17, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable dedicated to unearthing the future of resilient, adaptive philanthropy. Together, participants explored how funders are retooling their strategies, embracing new approaches to partnership and capital deployment, and designing innovative responses to ensure critical work continues—and flourishes—despite the headwinds.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the conversation appear below:

Key Takeaways:

Build resilience by expanding your role beyond grants.
Funders can use tools like loan guarantees, intermediary contracts, convenings, and data partnerships to unlock public dollars, de-risk capital projects, and move money more quickly to smaller and BIPOC-led organizations. This “beyond-the-grant” posture helps communities weather policy and funding shocks while preserving critical services.

Invest in leaders as people, not just as program drivers.
Sabbaticals, accelerators, and holistic leadership support shift leaders from surviving to stewarding long-term power. Funding wellness, reflection, and capacity functions as essential infrastructure for any durable ecosystem, not a luxury line item.

Move resources at the speed of community need.
Models like the Bridge Project’s direct cash to moms, rapid-response funds for immigrant communities, and crisis cash distributed through platforms such as GoFundMe show how trust-based, flexible capital can stabilize families and organizations in moments of acute disruption. Designing for speed, flexibility, and local decision-making allows philanthropy to meet the moment, not just the grant cycle.

Use data and narrative to protect civic infrastructure.
Tools like the Congressional District Health Dashboard and City Health Dashboard, paired with investigative and movement journalism, help communities see where systems are failing and where solutions are emerging. Revisiting philanthropic origin stories and aligning capital with equity, democracy, and community-defined priorities are critical to strengthening civic infrastructure.

Strengthen the ecosystem through relationships and matchmaking.
“Philanthropic matchmaking,” co-funding, and warm handoffs ensure that promising leaders and organizations can connect with the right capital, even when a single funder cannot meet a need. Transparent feedback, honest conversations about fit, and intentional network-building help great ideas secure flexible, multi-year support and reinforce that no one has to navigate this landscape alone.

Resiliency and Innovation in Nonprofit Leadership

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

A year after federal funding cuts, the dismantling of USAID, and politicized targeting of organizations advancing equity and justice, many nonprofits have been forced to adapt—revisiting their models, rethinking partnerships, and finding new ways to sustain mission-critical work amid heightened uncertainty.

On March 10, NationSwell and fellow nonprofit leaders gathered virtually for an honest, forward-looking discussion on what resiliency and innovation look like now, exploring how organizations are evolving to protect their missions, secure new sources of support, and design fresh solutions to address the widening gaps in funding and services left in the wake of these shifts. Some of the most salient insights from that discussion appear below.

Key takeaways

Build resilience through financial contingencies and diversified resources. Leaders are strengthening their ability to navigate uncertainty by planning for multiple scenarios and expanding the range of resources that sustain their work. Diversified funding creates the flexibility organizations need to adapt while continuing to serve communities.

Utilize partnerships as investments in long-term capacity. Nonprofit leaders and funders emphasize the power of trust-based philanthropy and capacity-building investments. Partnerships rooted in flexibility, shared learning, and multi-year support enable organizations to strengthen their operations while responding more effectively to shifting contexts.

Anchor innovation in a clear value proposition. In a disruptive environment where resources are constrained and expectations continue to rise, organizations are sharpening their understanding of the value they deliver. Clarity around distinct roles, interventions, and offerings, enables the sector’s most impactful ideas to emerge through creative adaptation.

Listen closely to key constituents through ongoing discovery. Resilient organizations are deeply attuned to the needs of the people and partners who shape their work. By continuously engaging communities, participants, funders, and collaborators through conversation, feedback, and observation, organizations can ensure that programs remain aligned with evolving needs.

Leverage storytelling to connect mission with impact. Storytelling is a powerful tool for navigating complexity while keeping organizations grounded in the purpose of their work. By translating outcomes into compelling narratives, nonprofits clarify the role of their programs, strengthen their relevance, and communicate both the urgency of today’s challenges and the progress being made.

Create shared infrastructure that strengthens the ecosystem. Rather than working in isolation, organizations should explore ways to pool resources, knowledge, and operational capacity across partnerships. Shared infrastructure allows nonprofits to scale impact and reduce duplication across the sector.

Strengthen the ecosystem through collective resilience. In times of uncertainty, nonprofit leadership relies on networks of support that extend across organizations, funders, and communities to enable progress toward shared goals. The strength to navigate disruption grows from shared responsibility, trusted partnerships, and the belief that the work only moves forward together.

Q1 2026 Social Impact Trends

Q1 2026 Social Impact Trends

TREND REPORT
Posted on
Download

NationSwell’s quarterly trend spotter provides impact professionals with visibility into the most noteworthy, timely, and material shifts in the field. For Q1 of 2026, our report explores the following six trends:

  1. Minneapolis ICE raids spark employee activism and minimalist business response
  2. OBBBA precipitating shifts in philanthropy, new corporate approaches
  3. Nonprofit anxiety around operational risks runs deep amidst legal and financial pressure
  4. AI adoption outpacing workforce readiness
  5. ESG notches a legal victory while confronting growing antitrust warnings
  6. Sustainability compliance remains a moving target for companies
Share this report
Recommended Features
Minneapolis
pexels tima miroshnichenko

Q4 2025 Social Impact Trends

Q4 2025 Social Impact Trends

TREND REPORT
Posted on
Download

NationSwell’s quarterly trend spotter provides impact professionals with visibility into the most noteworthy, timely, and material shifts in the field. For Q4 of 2025, our report explores the following six trends:

  1. Food security draws mainstream attention amid government shutdown
  2. AI-driven layoffs hit tech and service industries, but overall employment impact remains modest
  3. Philanthropies and nonprofits are investing more in AI, but governance needs to catch up
  4. Political leaders continuing pressure on corporate leadership and civil society
  5. Sustainability efforts continue, but more quietly and with less accountability
Share this report
Recommended Features
PepsiCO
hands around a boardroom table, laptops out, in deep discussion

Place Based Impact: Preparing Communities for Shifts in Funding

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Many communities are bracing for a new era of volatility in public funding. Federal and state commitments that once underpinned local economic development, workforce programs, public health, and social infrastructure are shifting—sometimes slowly, sometimes abruptly. For place-based partnerships, the question is no longer how to “navigate uncertainty,” but how to get ahead of it: building durable coalitions, diversified capital stacks, and locally anchored strategies that can withstand political and budget swings.

On February 24, NationSwell hosted leaders from philanthropy, business, and nonprofit organizations for a virtual Leader Roundtable on what it means to be proactive rather than reactive in this moment. Together, we identified some of the emerging funding realities that matter most, examined models that successfully blend public, private, and philanthropic investment, and explored how communities can lock in long-term capacity.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Key takeaways

Choose the sandbox before building the partnership. Cross-sector collaboration becomes more durable when partners identify a single, shared leverage point to experiment within first. Rather than attempting to solve everything at once, clarity about “where we play together” creates trust, momentum, and space for additional tentacles to grow over time.

Design for volatility, not stability. Federal funding cliffs, frozen allocations, and delayed rulemaking are cascading unevenly through state and local systems. The challenge is not only reduced dollars but radical unpredictability. Communities that build flexible structures — scenario planning, adaptable staffing, blended capital, diversified revenue — are better positioned than those waiting for clarity.

Build infrastructure that can outlast any single funding cycle. Place-based partnerships anchored around shared outcomes and generational time horizons prove more durable than programmatic responses tied to specific grants. When communities control data, define their own metrics, and align around long-term goals, funding shifts become disruptions — not existential threats.

Centering long term resilience while meeting emergency needs is critical. Crisis funding often pulls oxygen away from structural work. While emergency pivots are necessary, abandoning long-term capital strategies undermines resilience. Patient investment may move more slowly, but it builds the conditions that reduce the need for perpetual crisis response.

Sequence cross-sector roles intentionally — don’t assume alignment will happen organically. Many effective tools already exist across philanthropy, government, finance, and community organizations, but they operate in silos. Progress depends less on inventing new models and more on clarifying who de-risks first, who follows, and who sustains momentum over time.

Shift from dependency to agency in funding relationships. Traditional funding flows often create quiet dependency rather than shared ownership. This moment presents an opportunity to reimagine civic infrastructure so communities are less reliant on shifting political winds and more grounded in mutual aid, local partnership, and distributed leadership.

Define your highest leverage point with ruthless clarity. In periods of contraction, organizations that articulate a singular, sharp value proposition are better positioned to build durable partnerships. Simplicity creates alignment; alignment creates momentum.

Educate internally before reacting externally. Policy shifts, whether related to Medicaid, SNAP, or federal allocations, cascade through state and county systems unevenly. Investing in internal understanding of implementation realities builds smarter, steadier responses than reacting to headlines alone.

Plan for long-term disruption, not a return to “normal.” Assuming a political pendulum swing will restore prior funding norms creates strategic blind spots. Durable strategy accounts for sustained volatility rather than temporary turbulence.

Recognize that local governments are capacity-constrained, not idea-constrained. Municipal leaders are absorbing compounding responsibilities as federal roles recede. The barrier is rarely imagination; it is operational bandwidth and systems capacity. Partners who reduce friction and bring execution support add more value than those offering additional strategy alone.

Use this moment to reimagine civic infrastructure, not just fortify it. Resilience should not mean reinforcing fragile systems that created dependency in the first place. Volatility can serve as an opening to rethink power, partnership, and local agency. Cultural imagination and narrative often precede structural change.

Five Minutes with… Goodstack’s Aylin Oncel

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

As corporate impact programs grow more ambitious, they’re also becoming more complex. Employee engagement, grants, foundations, and product-led giving often evolve in parallel — built by different teams, on different systems, at different moments in time. The intent is strong — but without shared infrastructure, friction sets in: fragmented data, inconsistent governance, duplicated nonprofit relationships, and rising operational costs.

Enter Goodstack, which was built to address that disconnect. As expectations around transparency, compliance, and measurable impact continue to rise, the need for connective infrastructure has become more important than ever. Rather than layering new initiatives onto old systems, Goodstack helps organizations unify nonprofit verification, donation rails, governance, and reporting into a cohesive impact operating system — allowing distinct programs to remain purposeful while connected in execution.

For this installment of Five Minutes with…, NationSwell spoke with Aylin Oncel — VP of Social Impact at Goodstack — about what breaks down when social impact efforts remain siloed, why infrastructure is emerging as the next frontier of corporate impact, and what becomes possible when programs evolve from ad hoc initiatives into a connected, compounding strategy.

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: How would you describe the core problem Goodstack is trying to solve for in corporate social impact — what tends to break down inside companies when CSR programs, employee engagement, and product-led giving aren’t connected to each other?

Aylin Oncel, VP of Social Impact, Goodstack: In my role as VP of Social Impact at Goodstack, I spend a lot of time talking with companies that are deeply committed to doing good, but are navigating increasingly complex impact ecosystems. What I see consistently is not a lack of intent, but a lack of connective infrastructure.

Many impact efforts across an organization start off siloed. Employee engagement, grants, and product-led giving are usually built at different moments, by different teams, in response to different needs. That’s a realistic and often effective starting point. The challenge emerges as those programs scale.

As organizations grow, disconnected systems begin to create friction. Impact data fragments, experiences become inconsistent, and strategic alignment becomes harder to sustain, both internally and for the nonprofits on the receiving end. We often see the same nonprofit relationships managed across multiple tools, different verification standards applied across programs, and teams spending significant time reconciling data rather than learning from it. Operational costs increase, global rollouts slow down, and risk rises when governance and tracking are inconsistent.

Goodstack helps by providing shared infrastructure that allows these efforts to remain distinct in purpose, but connected in execution. By standardizing nonprofit verification, donation flows, governance, and reporting across programs, we help company impact evolve from standalone initiatives into a coherent, resilient impact operating system.

NationSwell: How do you define the role Goodstack is actually seeking to play for companies, and why does that distinction matter in the current CSR landscape?

Oncel, Goodstack: We think of Goodstack as infrastructure for corporate impact, and also as a strategic partner helping companies bring their impact efforts together in a way that’s sustainable over time.

Our role is to provide the core systems companies and nonprofits can rely on, including nonprofit verification, donation rails, governance frameworks, and shared visibility across employee programs, customer experiences, foundations, and grants. Our partnership shows up in helping teams see and operate those efforts as part of a single impact strategy, rather than as separate initiatives competing for attention or resources.

That distinction matters because impact work today is inherently cross-functional, while expectations around trust, compliance, and measurement continue to rise. Companies need flexibility in how they activate and scale giving, but they also need a partner who understands the full ecosystem and can help connect programs into a cohesive strategy. When that foundation is in place, teams spend less time rebuilding systems and more time focusing on outcomes, engagement, and long-term impact.

NationSwell: You’ve identified a gap between different internal CSR stakeholders — HR, foundations, product, sales — who often aren’t talking to each other. What’s lost when that fragmentation persists, and what becomes possible when those efforts are connected?

Oncel, Goodstack: When CSR efforts stay fragmented, the biggest thing that’s lost is momentum.

Each team may be doing meaningful work in isolation, but those efforts rarely reinforce one another. Employees don’t always see how their time or giving fits into a broader narrative. Impact data lives in disconnected spreadsheets. Leaders miss opportunities to understand what’s resonating, what’s scaling, and where real outcomes are being created.

When efforts are connected through shared infrastructure and standards, participation tends to increase because experiences are simpler and more transparent. Insights improve because impact is measured consistently. Companies move from one-off campaigns to an always-on strategy that scales across teams and geographies. Impact shifts from episodic to compounding.

NationSwell: Without getting into proprietary details, can you share an example of a moment when things really clicked — when a company started to see its impact efforts as one connected system, and changed how they worked or thought about CSR?

Oncel, Goodstack: One of the clearest “click” moments I’ve seen is when a company realizes it no longer needs separate systems for nonprofit programs, employee giving, and grants. Once the underlying infrastructure is standardized across nonprofit verification, donation flows, and shared reporting, impact stops feeling like a collection of disconnected initiatives and starts functioning as part of the company’s operating system.

Teams spend less time managing logistics and more time thinking strategically. Reporting cycles that once took weeks begin to happen in near real time, and moments like GivingTuesday shift from one-off obligations into genuine opportunities to accelerate engagement. Volunteer initiatives spark interest in giving, giving data surfaces the causes employees care about, and those insights inform grantmaking nominations and company-wide campaigns. Product-led programs reveal new opportunities to engage customers more meaningfully. Instead of running ad hoc initiatives, teams learn from patterns, adapt faster, and move forward with a shared sense of purpose.

NationSwell: How would you describe the next evolution of CSR, and what signals tell you whether or not we’re already moving in that direction?

Oncel, Goodstack: I see the next evolution of CSR unfolding across three dimensions.

First, expanding stakeholder engagement by embedding giving into products and everyday experiences. Thoughtful design makes participation intuitive and expands who gets to be part of impact.

Second, meet employees where they already are. Atlassian, a Goodstack partner, exemplifies this approach in its employee engagement program. As Atlassian employees volunteer and donate, they earn rewards for themselves and nonprofits they care about directly on the platform – with high-impact activities unlocking bigger rewards. It recognizes a wide range of giving behaviors and gives people a clear, flexible path to increasing their impact.

Third, connecting efforts across teams so impact isn’t experienced as a series of disconnected programs, but as a cohesive narrative that demonstrates compounding progress over time.

The signals are already here. More leaders are asking not just how much was given, but who it reached, what changed, and how programs influence behavior and outcomes. That shift in questioning reflects a maturing field.

NationSwell: Goodstack sits at a unique intersection of data, infrastructure, and ecosystem visibility. How do you think about using that vantage point to not just report on impact, but to help shape better decisions?

Oncel, Goodstack: We’re thoughtful about how we use data and AI, because visibility alone doesn’t drive better decisions. It has to be paired with strong infrastructure, clear standards, and human judgment.

Where AI becomes powerful for us is in reducing friction and surfacing patterns that are difficult to see across large, complex impact programs. That can include revealing where engagement drops off, where interest clusters around specific causes, or where programs unintentionally overlap. These insights help teams act with greater confidence and intention.

Importantly, AI isn’t replacing decision-making. It’s supporting it. By pairing intelligent systems with verified nonprofit data, consistent governance, and transparent reporting, we help leaders spend less time reconciling information and more time designing impact strategies that are intentional, equitable, and resilient over time.

NationSwell: For CSR leaders who feel stuck repeating the same campaigns year after year, what’s one question they should be asking themselves if they want to unlock a more integrated, strategic approach to impact?

I’d encourage leaders to step back and ask, what problem are we actually trying to solve?

It’s easy to default to familiar formats and moments on the calendar without reassessing whether they’re still aligned with today’s challenges. Instead of starting with what you’ve always done, it can be more powerful to focus on how you might unlock new impact in service of your goals and overall mission.

That might mean pulling different levers, such as engaging customers in giving, designing employee programs that drive meaningful behavior change, or increasing access to funding and visibility for nonprofits that are often overlooked. When infrastructure is stable, leaders have the freedom to think creatively, test new approaches thoughtfully, and learn from what works.

The shift isn’t about reinventing the wheel. It’s about being clearer on the outcomes you want and more strategic in how you get there.

A Comprehensive Approach to the 1% Tax Floor

A Comprehensive Approach to the 1% Tax Floor

The introduction of the 1% floor on corporate charitable deductions, imposed by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R.1) for tax years beginning December 31, 2025, has created a range of new considerations for companies to weigh in determining their corporate philanthropy strategy. 

To support NationSwell members in navigating this shift, we interviewed a Head of Corporate Impact at a Fortune 500 company who has made several critical moves to set up their resources and programs for long-term sustainability. 

The following resource outlines the steps taken over the course of approximately three months, each of which required close cross-enterprise collaboration. The processes and decisions described are intended to help leaders frame their own approaches, but should be considered within each organization’s own financial, legal, and tax context.

The steps outlined are:

  • Step 1: Align internally on the policy landscape
  • Step 2: Calculate the incremental tax impact to the business
  • Step 3: Fund philanthropy budget with tax-efficient capital
  • Step 4: Reclassify some philanthropy as ordinary business expense
  • Step 5: Take a multi-year view on philanthropic tax strategy
Share this report
Recommended Features
marvin meyer SYTO3xs06fU unsplash scaled
Hands in teamwork

PepsiCo | Feeding potential

PepsiCo | Feeding potential

How PepsiCo’s Food for Good is creating a blueprint for global food security

Food for Good — the PepsiCo Foundation initiative for advancing food security — launched in Dallas, Texas, as an exercise in deep listening. Through sustained conversations with trusted community volunteers and leaders, PepsiCo learned that the 19 million school-aged children in the U.S. who depend on free or reduced-price meals at school were facing critical gaps in access to nutritious food during the summer months, when school was not in session.

Beginning in the summer of 2009, PepsiCo leveraged its food production, logistics, and distribution expertise — as well as a partnership with Frito-Lay, the convenient foods business unit of PepsiCo, that allowed for borrowed access to trucks and warehouse space — to prototype a summer meal delivery model. The privately-funded program quickly expanded into new cities, eventually outgrowing its original facility but maintaining its original commitment to staying rooted in community feedback and mission to fight hunger through access and equity.

Food for Good combines large-scale meal distribution, job creation, targeted child nutrition, disaster relief, and impactful storytelling to distribute nutritious meals and address crisis-driven hunger at scale.

 

Back to main page

Share this report
Recommended Features
A female consoles a student in a classroom setting
Woman on laptop