Why existing support simply isn’t enough 

A garment factory in Tiruppur, Tamil Nadu, India. Photo: REUTERS/Francis Mascarenhas

Last year, a youth organisation in Venezuela approached TrustLaw after a ban on funding from foreign sources had left them legally exposed and operationally paralysed. Through our TrustLaw service, we connected them with pro bono governance advice, which supported them to navigate the new regulations and keep their doors open. 

Reflecting on this case and what we’ve heard from this organisation – and so many others like it – revealed a deeper problem. The legal help was essential, yet it wasn’t able to address the organisation’s broader crises:

• the funding collapse triggered by the ban,
• the stigma of being labelled a “foreign agent,”
• rapid technological change outpacing their capacity,
• and governance restructuring needed to adapt their model.

Legal support alone simply wasn’t enough.

The real problem: simultaneous pressure 

When we surveyed nearly 150 civil society organisations (CSOs) in our TrustLaw network last year, the picture wasn’t simply one of unmet need – it was one of simultaneous pressure. Half reported increasing legal needs, while the same organisations were navigating funding collapses, governance questions, digital security vulnerabilities, and communications challenges – often at the same time, with the same small team. While continuing in their commitment and dedication to their missions and the communities they support, internally the pressures told a different story.

As one organisation working across multiple jurisdictions described it: “the pace and divergence of requirements across jurisdictions make ongoing compliance an active effort” – one that consumed resources they simply didn’t have. This creates tension between what organisations outwardly deliver and what they can maintain internally, leading to staff burnout and ultimately to organisational collapse

This simultaneous pressure is the reality that the sector wasn’t prepared for, and that most support wasn’t designed to address.

The problem with siloed support

After 15 years working in international development, I have seen and contributed to many different programmatic interventions. This is precisely why I believe we need to be honest about their limits, understand the opportunities for improvement and innovation, and shift towards intuitive and agile solutions. 

The civil society support ecosystem – pro bono legal networks, organisational development programmes, capacity-building initiatives – was largely built from Europe and the US based on development theories that didn’t reflect the reality, voices and needs of CSOs operating in different contexts.   

Over recent years, as resources have decreased and political pressures and legal restrictions intensified, a critical gap has emerged. The system is calling for an integrated approach that helps CSOs to build sustainable and resilient foundations – not “one size fits all” solutions.   

Yet many existing programmes don’t fit this reality. They tend to be long-cycle and funder-led. They are generic, and built around disciplines and services – such as legal, financial or communications – rather than around individual organisations’ vision of development, resilience and sustainability. They treat organisations as passive recipients rather than active agents of their own development.

What holistic support actually means 

“Holistic support” has become a sector buzzword. In practice this means surrendering traditional assumptions around best practice. Instead, it demands listening, discovery and co-design to develop bespoke, integrated solutions. 

It means legal health checks that detects compliance risks before they become crises. It means communications support that helps organisations tell their story under pressure, not just when things are going well. It means financial literacy and sustainability planning that is connected to the legal and governance realities they are navigating. It means AI policies and digital security guidance – areas our survey identified as a growing and largely unmet need. And it means governance advice for organisations considering mergers or restructuring to survive. 

Critically, it means all these elements working together – not delivered sequentially by different providers who don’t communicate. Truly effective support must be integrated around a single organisation’s context and operating reality. 

Our solution 

The diagnostic tool at the heart of our Resilience Accelerator addresses what the sector currently lacks: mapping an organisation’s vulnerabilities and opportunities across multiple dimensions, then building support around the findings, mission, priorities and context – not around what we already offer.  

Alongside tackling significant problems they might be facing, we are consistently seeing participants choosing at least one growth or innovation project they would otherwise lack of capacity or funding to pursue.  

This approach isn’t new for the Thomson Reuters Foundation. We’ve supported civil society via our TrustLaw service since 2010. We’ve provided support for the sustainability of independent newsrooms for around 15 years, combining legal, editorial, financial, and operational expertise around their specific pressures. This model works because it starts with listening and understanding, not with a menu of services.