Strengthening Safeguarding in Philanthropy: A LabStorm with the Funder Safeguarding Collaborative

Feedback Labs | March 24, 2025

About the Funder Safeguarding Collaborative

Founded in 2021, the Funder Safeguarding Collaborative (FSC) was created by Comic Relief, Global Fund for Children, The National Lottery Community Fund, Oak Foundation, and Porticus to help grantmakers integrate safeguarding principles into their funding practices. Housed within the Global Fund for Children, FSC supports a growing global network of funders, including 22 U.S.-based foundations, in building a world where organizational cultures and practices actively prevent harm.

FSC defines safeguarding as the measures taken to prevent and respond to all forms of harm, abuse, and exploitation for anyone who interacts with a funder or grantee organization. However, in the U.S., “safeguarding” is not commonly understood, making it challenging for FSC to engage funders and nonprofits in adopting these critical practices.

The Challenge

FSC came to this LabStorm with a central question: How can U.S.-based funders be incentivized to embed safeguarding into their grant-making and operational strategies? Key challenges included:

A lack of common understanding of safeguarding in the U.S. Many organizations equate safeguarding with risk management rather than a proactive commitment to preventing harm.
Limited incentives for funders to prioritize safeguarding. Unlike in the UK, where regulatory frameworks drive compliance, U.S. funders lack clear external pressures to adopt safeguarding measures.
Ensuring safeguarding efforts align with trust-based philanthropy. How can funders uphold safeguarding without it feeling imperialistic or overly bureaucratic for grantees?

Key Discussions

1. Reframing Safeguarding for a U.S. Context

One of the biggest barriers FSC faces is terminology. In the U.S., “safeguarding” is often misunderstood or associated with data protection or security measures. Participants explored alternative ways to frame safeguarding in ways that resonate with U.S.-based funders:

“Keeping People Safe” was suggested as a more accessible phrase that plainly describes the purpose of safeguarding efforts.
“Abuse Prevention” has been effective for some organizations in opening conversations about risk and accountability.
“Psychological Safety” was highlighted as an entry point, as many organizations already have internal discussions about workplace well-being and harm prevention.

The group agreed that while safeguarding is a global concept, its language and framing must be adapted to encourage broader adoption in the U.S. philanthropic sector.

2. Creating Incentives for U.S. Funders and Grantees

Since safeguarding is not a formal requirement for U.S. funders, organizations need compelling reasons to prioritize it. The group explored three major incentive structures:

Mission and Value Alignment: Positioning safeguarding as an integral part of impact-driven philanthropy can motivate funders to see it as a core component of ethical funding.
Risk Management: Safeguarding can be framed as a proactive strategy to reduce legal and reputational risks, appealing to funders concerned with long-term sustainability.
Operational Efficiency: Embedding safeguarding across DEI, HR, and operations teams can streamline policies, avoiding duplication and improving internal coordination.

3. Aligning Safeguarding with Trust-Based Philanthropy

One of the biggest concerns raised was whether funders introducing safeguarding requirements for their grantee partners could feel like a top-down, prescriptive process—which runs counter to trust-based philanthropy. Participants explored ways to balance accountability with grantee autonomy:

Strengths-Based Approaches: Rather than imposing rigid safeguarding requirements and enforcing compliance, funders can work alongside grantees to elevate existing good practices that reflect community understandings of safety and cultural contexts.
Flexible Implementation: Some funders have successfully adopted a developmental approach, where organizations work toward safeguarding benchmarks over time rather than facing immediate compliance demands.
Integrating Safeguarding into Learning Cohorts: Establishing peer networks where grantees can exchange ideas and co-design solutions makes safeguarding feel collaborative rather than enforced.

By shifting from compliance-driven safeguarding to a grantee-led, co-created model, funders can build mutual trust while still prioritizing safety and accountability.

Key Takeaways

Language matters. Adapting safeguarding terminology for a U.S. audience—such as using “Keeping People Safe” or “Abuse Prevention”—can improve understanding and buy-in.
Funders need clear incentives. Mission and value alignment, risk management, and operational efficiency can motivate funders to integrate safeguarding into their strategies.
Safeguarding must align with trust-based philanthropy. Funders should ensure they focus on existing good practice and local understandings of safeguarding to ensure safeguarding practices are practical, equitable, and culturally responsive.

Conclusion

This LabStorm with the Funder Safeguarding Collaborative underscored the critical role of funders in creating safer, more accountable philanthropic practices. By reframing safeguarding, building stronger incentives, and ensuring a co-creative approach, FSC is working to embed safety and well-being into the heart of philanthropy.

Do you have ideas for how funders can better integrate safeguarding into their work? Share your thoughts in the comments below or reach out to us at [email protected] to continue the conversation!

Learn More About LabStorms

LabStorms are collaborative problem-solving sessions designed to help organizations tackle feedback-related challenges or share what’s working well in their practice.