And while the 2024 spike followed a deadly natural disaster in Spain, there was still good underlying growth between 2023 and 2025, according to data from the Observatorio del Fundraising, an initiative of EFA member Asociación Española de Fundraising (AEFr).

In 2023, the 26 organisations providing data to the Observatorio received 5.3m donations, worth €197.6m in total, with an average gift of €37.

In 2024, the floods drove the number of donations to 13.7m, more than two and a half times the previous year’s figure. The growth in income to €242.7m was still significant, while the average gift more than halved to less than €18.

In 2025, donations fell back to 5.5m, slightly above 2023’s level. However, the average gift recovered to €42, higher than before the floods, meaning income versus 2023 was up by 17.1%, at €231.5m.

Previously, data published by AEFr showed that a group of 13 nonprofits had raised more than €149m in response to the DANA meteorological event which caused huge floods in October 2024. The disaster claimed more than 220 lives, mostly in the eastern province of Valencia.

As Fundraising Europe detailed last year, the relief effort included more than 9,000 volunteers and 500 professionals, with more than 160,000 food kits, 40,000 hygiene kits and 5,000 kg of medical supplies delivered.

The article accompanying the new AEFr stats urges fundraisers to study their data closely, saying:

“An emergency like the one caused by the DANA can bring in people who have never donated, reactivate former donors or generate additional gifts from those who already give. Once the emergency has passed, it is worth knowing how many of those people give again, how often and in what way.”

Funding Organisational Development: From Insight to Action is aimed at foundations that currently provide funding for nonprofits’ organisational development (OD) activities, and foundations that want to do more of this in future.

OD — a term often used interchangeably with ‘capacity strengthening’ or ‘capacity building’ — is defined in the guide as “the ongoing work of strengthening an organisation so it can deliver its mission effectively, adapt to change, and sustain its impact over time”.

It lists six areas of capacity strengthening that are receiving increasing interest from funders, with financial resilience being one of them. The guide says there is a stronger emphasis on “more systemic and forward-looking approaches” to financial sustainability, and comments:

“In response to shrinking institutional funding and the growth of alternative financing models, some funders are supporting organisations to think beyond grants, strengthen decision-making under uncertainty, and develop more adaptive approaches to financial sustainability.”

The other five areas are:

• Crisis-oriented capacity strengthening, with the guide calling this a “major, rapidly expanding frontier”. This helps organisations needing to survive a crisis, close responsibly or undergo other processes such as mergers or shared staffing models.
• Well-being and mental health. This reflects the view that organisational resilience “depends heavily on human resilience”.
• Safety and security, including legal preparedness and digital security, with organisations increasingly “operating under constraint, repression or heightened scrutiny”.
• Conflict sensitivity, which the guide says is particularly important as organisations operate in increasingly polarised or fragmented environments. It aims to strengthen organisations “without reinforcing harm or division”.
• Digital transformation, especially in relation to access to AI tools, responsible use of data and the limited funding available for digital infrastructure.

Across all six areas, the guide says that support is becoming “more expansive, adaptive, and grounded in real-world complexity”.

Unrestricted funding guidance

Separately, Philea has published Unrestricted Funding: A Practical Guide for Funders. This new resource is designed to provide grantmakers with the “knowledge and tools they need to address their concerns as they shift more to unrestricted funding”.

It includes three documents designed to support an individual wanting to make the case to a board for shifting to unrestricted funding. The three different versions respectively aim to convince a cautious or risk-averse board, an impact-driven board, or a board concerned about organisational legitimacy.

This story begins with a situation common to many nonprofit organisations:

• A Board convinced that fundraising is an exquisitely “technical” task to be left to the fundraising team once general guidelines have been established.
• A fundraising team aware of a project’s potential and the target that needs to be reached, but also aware that relationships linked to a major donor programme often require an institutional door opener.

What happens when this cycle is broken?

The story of this campaign — now close to reaching the ambitious milestone of 5 million euros for the major renovation of a building to be used for university services — illustrates how the right spark can change the culture across an entire Board.

The organisation we advised works in education and had never carried out a major donor campaign. The fundraising team, with recent experience just in mass marketing fundraising campaigns, had nevertheless drawn up a feasibility plan for a typical capital campaign project, based on realistic figures, a reasonable timeline, and engaging, emotional communication.

The presentation of the plan to the Board generated approval and enthusiasm, but no offers of support followed. This was not unusual — traditionally, the Board was reluctant to share contacts, leverage relationships, or provide real support, despite showing great respect for the fundraising team’s work.

Tip No. 1: Identifying the problem is already a step toward its resolution. In this case, it was clear that the Board was confusing its approval of the fundraising plan with working alongside the team to help achieve it.

To unblock the situation, the focus needed to shift. We suggested to the Head of Development that they stop focusing on requests to the entire Board for the possible names of major donors. Instead, together, we should work to find a “hook” — that is, a Board member (or ideally more than one) with an interest and willingness to go deeper, to feel part of a project, and literally lend a hand.

In this case, the ideal “hook” was a Board member with significative experience at a university where fundraising was considered a responsibility shared by the faculty. He therefore understood the role they wanted him to play: not necessarily making the “ask,” but supporting the fundraising team in opening up relationships.

Tip No. 2: To identify who, within the Board, might have a proactive attitude toward fundraising, you need to get to know the Board members. This can only happen through meeting them outside of formal meetings or official occasions. The time dedicated to getting to know, cultivating, and involving Board members is undoubtedly among the best investments that a fundraising team can make.

Together with the head of development, we met with this Board member to discuss the restoration project and the associated fundraising in more detail, sharing some ideas for moving forward. This prompted him to recall that among his contacts was a network of international managers and entrepreneurs, many of whom felt a strong desire to put down roots in the area and be useful to the local community.

A simple, informal conversation with one of these contacts at an event gave the Board member an opportunity to talk about and raise awareness of the organisation’s project, and the idea to invite him to visit the renovation site, along with four other contacts. There, he guided them through a tour focused on the future: “imagine the researchers who will be sitting here, the students who will meet there,” and so on. In other words, he shared an experience and an almost tangible vision of the future.

Then, he passed the ball to the fundraising team so they could proceed independently with the “ask”. He did not replace the fundraisers, nor did he feel the pressure of having to ask: he facilitated the relationship, prepared it, and then let the fundraising experts handle the request, the approach, and the communication.

This is what Board members are called upon to do: to be facilitators and relationship builders, and not (necessarily, always) to ask for donations.

The result was a first major donation. This was followed by two further contacts shared by the same Board member, and two additional donations.

At the next Board meeting, he shared what had happened with the rest of the Board — not as a lesson in fundraising, but about the wonderful encounters he had experienced and, almost to his own surprise, how those encounters had generated support.

Needless to say, this created a snowball effect that enabled the organisation to raise nearly 3 million euros thanks to the Board’s support.

At that stage, it became no longer simply a matter of presenting an idea by those who had embraced it — the Board, the fundraising team — but, much more effectively, by real testimonials from the first three donors.

The campaign is now in its final stages and the 5-million-euro goal is just around the corner. It required around two years of work, meetings, creativity, proposals drafted and refined, many “no’s,” but also the “yes’s” that ultimately made all the difference. Above all, it brought the realisation that fundraising is not just a hot potato that can only be handled by specialists in the field, and that an engaged Board brings a quantum leap in quality, particularly when it comes to the most ambitious targets.

Key Takeaways

• When faced with a ‘passive’ Board, rather than asking for contacts it is far more effective to ask yourself how you can bypass that passivity and turn it into a catalyst.  Identifying the right ‘player’ — the Board member with the strongest affinity for the project, the one whose expertise is most aligned, or simply the one most open to organising discussions and building a network of contacts — has the power to take fundraising to the next level. Work directly with that person to exchange ideas and develop concrete actions. It usually works. And, above all, it then inspires other Board members to follow suit.
• The ‘hot potato’ issue of fundraising must be defused by fundraisers: the Board needs to be gradually guided towards a genuine understanding of what this tool entails and what is expected of them. Not necessarily requests, but relationships and contacts: in short, opening doors to share a vision. The fundraising team can then handle the technical proposal and the negotiations.
• Basing the relationship with the Board solely on plans and budgets is not that effective. Instead, it is better to incorporate suggestions, ideas and proposals: a visit to the construction site seemed an obvious idea to the fundraisers, yet it was welcomed by the Board as an extremely useful suggestion they hadn’t considered in terms of engaging prospective donors. Enthusiasm is generated through direct experience, not through PDF reports.

To conclude: involving the Board of Directors does not require miracles, but a shift in perspective.

When fundraisers stop asking the Board merely ‘Who can we contact?’, and start looking at Board involvement from this ‘sideways’ perspective, things begin to change. In this case, the ‘hook’ was a single Board member who took the initiative, providing the catalyst needed. In other cases, identifying and stimulating the ‘hook’ will be the fundraiser’s responsibility. In all cases, we need to find a trigger point from which to generate engagement.

Fundraising is not a cold transaction: it is building a relationship of support. And once the Board discovers its value, there is no going back.

About Simona Biancu

Founder of ENGAGEDin and an international consultant with over 15 years of expertise in strategic fundraising, philanthropy, and board development, Simona Biancu has driven growth for global nonprofit institutions, notably leading development, marketing, and fundraising departments for prestigious organizations such as the European Union Youth Orchestra and Fondazione Accademia Teatro alla Scala. A seasoned board member and international lecturer, she is a pioneer in board governance literature as co-author of “Board in prima fila” (2020) and the blog “Welcome on Board”, backed by a Master’s degree in Fundraising from the University of Bologna and an Executive Certificate in Strategic Philanthropy.

IFOP’s research found that 44% of French donors — or 31% of the total population — said they had made an ‘in memoriam’ gift at some point. This form of giving is worth tens of millions of euros per year to French charities, France générosités says — compared to around £2bn (€2.4bn) annually in the UK, according to separate data from Legacy Futures.

These donors were equally likely to make their gift through the three named channels: a cash donation at a funeral or memorial ceremony; an online pot created by the deceased’s family; and directly on the website of the named nonprofit.

Nearly three-quarters (72%) of donors aged 18-24 had made an ‘in memoriam’ gift, followed by 62% of 25–34s and 51% of 15–17s. The figures are below 50% for older groups: 44% of 35–49s, 33% of 50–64s, 36% of 65–74s and 18% of those aged 75+.

More than half (57%) of those with a monthly income below €900 have made such a gift.

The figure declines to 45% for those with a €900-€1,300 income, 39% of those earning €1,300–€1,900 and 33% for €1,900–€2,500. It rises slightly, to 36%, for those taking home more than €2,500 per month.

‘In memoriam’ givers were asked if they had continued to support the nonprofit in question after making that gift. Half (51%) said they had done so of their own accord, while 16% said they had done so having been asked by the organisation. While 10% said they did not continue their support and would not want to, another 23% said they would have done so if approached.

France générosités says ‘in memoriam’ giving is “still underexploited” in France. Last year the organisation signed a partnership with Fédération Nationale du Funéraire (FNF), designed to make ‘in memoriam’ fundraising easier for families. Pascal Caton, president of the FNF, comments:

“‘In memoriam’ giving is not just a form of generosity. Above all, it is a way for some families to prolong the memory of a loved one through a charitable act. Our collective responsibility is to support this process with simplicity, respect and humanity.”

A year on from the 2025 EFA European Fundraising4Democracy Tour, democracy and civic space remain under extreme pressure, with continuing attacks on organisations and individuals, and new legal and funding barriers. Platform reactions to EU regulation of political advertising, particularly Meta’s, have also made it harder for NGOs to communicate, build communities and raise funds online. In an EFA survey of 170 organisations across 21 EU countries, a majority said the regulation was harming their freedom of expression and ability to act.

“So what can fundraising do about this?” asked EFA executive director Eduard Marček as he opened this year’s European Fundraising4Democracy Tour — a dynamic online event showcasing the best of European fundraising for democracy and civic space. “It probably cannot save democracy as such, but it can help and support organisations which are defending rights and democratic values. It can build broad bases of supporters and it can give people a practical way to express their voice and to make themselves heard.”

Speakers shared practical examples of how fundraising, crowdfunding, and civic engagement can help defend democratic values with attendees from 15 countries.

Here are the eight examples presented, and their key lessons.

1. Be ready to capitalise on media attention

Ali Walker Davis of Forward Action in the UK explained how to turn media attention into action quickly. “The news economy is speeding up and attention has a rapidly decreasing half-life, so if it’s difficult to move quickly, you’re going to miss those opportunities to engage,” she said. 

After a far-right rally in the UK, Forward Action helped Hope Not Hate launch a simple handraiser within days. It asked people to add their name to the ‘biggest record of hope against hate’, then to leaflet their area with a message of unity, and later, to donate. 45,000 people took the first action, and the campaign gained 33,000 new email subscribers, 4,000 volunteers (who distributed 1m leaflets in one weekend) and £30,000 in donations.

The secret, Ali said, is readiness: knowing which moments you’ll respond to and what roles supporters can play; having templates for emails, action pages, sign-up forms, donation journeys and tracking; and being clear about who signs off. “Being ready with a simple action is better than something that’s very robust on the policy front, but takes too long to get out. Actions like sign, donate, share, or send a message of solidarity are really effective, particularly when there are people on the frontline coming under attack.”

2. Use Meta’s targeting limits as opportunities

Ján Plišnák of PS:Digital in Slovakia spoke about reaching new audiences despite Meta’s restrictions. Custom audiences can be especially useful: ask similar NGOs, or organisations whose followers share an affinity with your cause, to share their audience for your campaign, he said. “It’s GDPR-friendly because you don’t share any personal information – just an anonymised audience.”

Ján described a campaign for the Milan Simecka Foundation. Simecka’s grandson leads the country’s biggest (pro-democracy) opposition movement but has no connection with the foundation. Even so, the government exploited the shared name to paint the foundation as political, and grants and partnerships dried up.

“We turned the targeting limitation into an opportunity: if we couldn’t target civil society or democracy directly, we’d hack the algorithm indirectly. We teamed up with friendly, like-minded pages and invited them to share their audiences. We also used a wide mix of creative formats to give the algorithm as many chances as possible to learn, adapt, and deliver results.”

3. Turn young people’s willingness to engage into lasting participation

In France, 8 in 10 young people say they’re ready to get involved in a cause they care about: the challenge is turning that into lasting participation, said Oriane Penny-Lepastier, from France’s Institut de L’Engagement.

Since 2012 the Institut has supported more than 11,000 young people who have shown their potential through volunteering, civic service or community action, selecting them for what they’ve done rather than education or background. “We see young people that have organised projects, helped vulnerable people, protected the environment or supported children in community actions. Through this, they discover something very powerful: that they can be useful, that they can change something in the society they live in – a feeling that’s very important for democracy.”

The key, she said, is for universities, employers and institutions to recognise and value the skills that engagement creates: recognition builds confidence, and confidence makes further engagement possible. Democratic education must also keep pace with AI, so the Institut is building algorithmic literacy into its work. “We need to give them the knowledge to understand the world, and the power to believe that they can change it.”

4. Look beyond traditional funding models to build democracy from the ground up

Martina Turola from The Good Lobby in Italy shared a voting rights campaign that shows what funding democracy from the ground up takes: a mixed funding base, and campaigning and fundraising treated as one activity. The campaign addressed a gap that leaves around 5 million Italians away from home for study, work or healthcare unable to vote where they live. Beginning as a grassroots effort, The Good Lobby joined in 2018 to provide support.

Because Italian philanthropy tends not to engage with civil rights work, the team looked beyond traditional funders, starting with Guerilla Foundation which backs grassroots activists, then building on existing relationships, including with Open Society and Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo. Family office support and a base of individual donors followed, enabling a move from awareness-raising to more sophisticated advocacy: a petition, a report showing Italy was the only big European country without remote voting, and strategic litigation. A test of offsite voting was secured for the 2025 referendums, letting around 67,000 people apply to register.

To build a stable donor base, the team reached new audiences through university and city tours, sports champions as ambassadors, symbolic ballot boxes and crowdfunding. “If a campaign creates a strong sense of ownership among citizens, mobilisation can become a way of building a constituency of supporters,” Martina said. A popular initiative bill has since helped put offsite voting into the electoral law reform now under discussion, and she expects a route to securing it for the next general election even if that reform fails.

5. Think bigger with crowdfunding

Gvantsa Kakauridze of Georgia’s Orbeliani Foundation explained how crowdfunding has become a tool for solidarity and resistance as democracy backslides, where it was once mostly used for individual causes. The turning point came two years ago, when the governing party suspended the country’s EU integration until 2028: people took to the streets, and the government responded with violence and repressive laws.

Giving changed in response. People began raising money for the families of prisoners of conscience. Independent media outlets, cut off from foreign funding by new laws, ran campaigns to survive. Protesters, who have gathered every evening for almost 600 days and been fined for it, are also supported through crowdfunding. And because donations can be anonymous, it offers a safe way to participate for those who cannot protest openly, such as public-sector workers.

Monthly campaigns now support prisoners’ families, and donors see themselves as part of a collective effort. “It’s become the way to be an active citizen,” Gvantsa said. “Fundraising can build trust and civic networks, it can protect independent voices, support people facing repression, sustain civic participation, and turn individual donations into collective actions.”

6. Understand your audience to remove barriers and build support

Almost half of Ireland’s LGBTQ+ community are suffering economic hardship, and LGBTQ+ charities face a funding shortfall that threatens their services. National datasets often overlook sexuality, so TU Dublin and the Outhouse LGBTQ+ Centre surveyed LGBTQ+ and straight people to find out who supports LGBTQ+ charities, how the community’s giving differs from the general population’s, and what barriers prevent participation in the workforce and society.

Sharing early results, Antonio Vega, a PhD researcher in behavioural economics at TU Dublin, said LGBTQ+ respondents were more likely to be left-wing, younger, on lower household incomes and non-religious. They were less likely to give money but more likely to volunteer, fundraise and campaign. Donors to LGBTQ+ charities also differ from the traditional Irish donor, being younger, and driven by fairness and social justice rather than religious obligation or tax incentives. “We also discovered something really amazing, that 81% of financial donors to Irish LGBTQ+ causes identify as non-LGBTQ+,” he said. About 66% are also women, many of them young, and 100% felt motivated by altruism.

Antonio drew three lessons for LGBTQ+ causes. First, move away from tax-incentive appeals and frame campaigns around systemic change, justice and fairness. Second, “value your non-monetary assets and recognise volunteering, campaigning and advocacy as core pillars for donor retention, because these activists are your long-time organisational allies”. Third, keep pushing for sexual orientation and gender identity questions in the census.

7. Use cultural participation to launch and sustain a movement

Sara Tokina of the Belarus Outside Sound System charity music movement shared how a community in exile uses music to build solidarity and awareness, and to raise funds. The movement grew out of repression and exile: the violent suppression of the 2020 protests forced much of Belarus’s cultural community to flee. After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, those in political exile needed to show that Belarusians who opposed dictatorship also opposed war and stood with Ukraine. “In March 2022, we brought Belarusian artists together and organised our first event – a rave with donation-based entry. We raised €4,000 for a Ukrainian foundation, which helped children affected by the war.”

That event established a two-level fundraising model: institutional donors and cultural partners, plus audience giving, music sales and visibility generated by events. The movement has since organised a four-city international tour, a digital compilation (plus vinyl edition) of 13 Belarusian producers, a charity festival, and four simultaneous events across Poland on the day of Belarus’s 2025 presidential election. Together, these have reached more than 80,000 streams and over 10,000 event visitors, raised more than €30,000, and brought international attention to the situation in Belarus.

Sara drew four lessons: participation can lead to giving; people need to understand where their money goes; partnerships connect cultural participation with direct support; and formats must stay flexible. “Our community is spread across different countries, and we can’t stay together in one physical space,” she said. “But we still can gather around music. From that shared experience, trust, visibility and support can grow.”

8. Fight disinformation by playing to your strengths

Larissa Probst of the German Fundraising Association (DFRV) described how civil society organisations in Germany responded within 48 hours when far-right party AfD launched an “exposé platform”. It aimed to expose alleged NGO mismanagement, mixing real information with misleading claims and AI-generated videos, and published personal data about volunteer leaders. Recognising that every click would feed the platform traffic and amplify it, the DFRV and an alliance of partners launched a coordinated response.

They emailed organisations advising them not to click on or share the AfD’s content, with recommendations for reframing the narrative, and ready-to-use materials, and ran an online exchange to align messaging and coordinate next steps. Each organisation contributed what it already did best: one offered legal templates for requesting removal of false information, another took a secure copy of the platform’s content so groups could check it for errors about themselves, and others offered communications mentoring for smaller groups. “None of us did anything we’d never done before, but instead really used our expertise,” said Larissa.

The platform quickly lost momentum as a result and was not used at the party’s national conference as planned. Larissa’s takeaway was that specialisation, shared tools and collective capacity matter more than size. “We don’t always need a lot of resources, but just to share what we already know and the strengths which are available.”

The EFA European Fundraising4Democracy Tour will return in September 2027. Catch up with the presentations from 2025 and 2026 here, read the 2025 summary, and for more useful support, check out our resources page here.

For example, should commission-based payment for fundraisers be universally prohibited, or could it be appropriate in some cultures? And is it always the best option to adopt messaging which praises a donor for the impact they have enabled, or might it be less effective in societies with more collectivist as opposed to individualist values?

These and other questions are posed by fundraising think tank Rogare in a new project that will eventually provide tools supporting fundraisers across the world to adopt professional practices grounded in their local culture.

To kick off the project, Rogare has published a working paper entitled Does one size fit all? Cultural differences in the evolution and development of global fundraising professions.

It highlights that much of the thinking about fundraising standards originates in English-speaking regions — also referred to as the anglosphere or the Anglo-Saxon world — and is then exported to fundraising communities around the world.

Building on this initial working paper, Rogare intends to establish working groups in different countries, regions and cultures, to examine these issues. Rogare’s website says:

“The purpose of this project is not for Rogare to tell fundraisers in any particular country how they should professionalise (which would not be in the spirit or ethos of the thing). Instead ‘Does one size fit all?’ aims to provide a template approach that fundraisers in different countries or cultures can follow or adapt.”

Alice Ferris, a partner at consultancy GoalBusters and a member of Rogare’s Council and its Critical Fundraising Network, writes in her foreword to the paper:

“The fundraising profession keeps mistaking its own reflection for a universal law. What gets called best practice is often just the dominant culture’s practice, treated as though it were neutral and beyond question. Left unexamined, that habit exports the assumption that one culture’s way of fundraising is the way for communities who never agreed to that premise.

“My hope for this project is that it builds humility in both directions. Humility from the anglosphere to ask why something became ‘best practice’ before assuming it belongs everywhere, and humility from local cultures to look honestly at the assumptions of their own fundraising practices. The real work isn’t defending or throwing out any single standard. It’s asking what value that standard was meant to serve, and then finding out how that value already lives, or could live, in a given community.”

Full details of the project, including the downloadable working paper can be found here.

The survey of almost 500 fundraisers was conducted by the French Association of Fundraisers (AFF) between February and April 2026 to better understand the pressures they face, the impact on their mental health, and what can help. Most were full-time employees with more than two years’ experience.  

Key findings 

• 57% report high or very high stress 

• 63% have experienced burnout or a near-burnout situation at some point in their career 

• Managers are more affected: 67% report high stress (versus 50% of non-managers), and 73% have experienced burnout or come close 

• 76% think about work outside working hours, and 58% struggle to switch off 

• Only 20% often or always feel calm and relaxed, and just 14% woke up feeling rested in the two weeks before the survey 

• 51% have seriously considered leaving their job in the past 12 months 

At the same time, there were also positives: half said their daily lives are often or always filled with interesting things, and 41% reported being in good spirits. 

Sources of pressure 

Respondents cited declining funding (54%), pressure to compensate for falling resources (58%) and rising targets as resources shrink (51%) as key sources of pressure. 42% are very concerned about their organisation’s long-term viability, rising to 52% among lone fundraisers. 

How work is organised also adds to the strain, particularly last-minute requests (52%), short-term demands overriding strategy (50%) and administrative and reporting burdens (45%). The report adds that the pressure many fundraisers put on themselves reflects strong commitment but can also become a vulnerability. 

Relationships with donors and supporters are seen positively, with 65% describing them as built on trust and partnership. However, only 48% feel able to set professional boundaries, and 17% have encountered inappropriate behaviour. 

Impact on work 

The stress experienced has tangible effects on professional practice: 47% have cut back on high-value activities due to lack of time, 45% said their motivation suffered and 40% felt the quality of their work declined. Some 74% have worked while their ability to function was impaired by stress, including 30% who do so often or very often, yet despite this the majority (78%) have never taken sick leave because of stress. 

Support gaps 

Flexible hours and remote working are widespread (77%) and the right to disconnect is generally respected (65%). Formal support such as coaching and mentoring is less common however, although the more measures an organisation has in place, the lower the reported stress.  

Two in three respondents said mental health is discussed in their organisation, mainly by HR (26%) and senior leadership (25%), while only 15% said their line manager raises it. 

Overall though: 

• 46% do not have regular conversations about their wellbeing 

• 39% feel their workload is rarely or never prioritised 

• 27% do not feel safe discussing their difficulties 

What fundraisers want 

Asked what measures they would like to see implemented respondents most often chose peer discussion groups (20%) and tools for prioritising workloads. Open-ended answers pointed to working conditions, with fundraisers keen to see more staff, resources matched to fundraising targets, clearer priorities, and a better understanding of the profession from management and governing bodies. 

More on this topic: Read AFF CEO Yaële Aferiat’s reflections on the study findings here.

Fundraisers dedicate their professional lives to helping others. They work every day to generate the resources that allow charities, foundations, universities, hospitals and social organisations to fulfil their missions. They help causes grow, communities thrive and social challenges receive the attention and support they deserve.

Yet one question is rarely asked: who takes care of the people whose work is to take care of causes?

This year, the French Association of Fundraisers (AFF) conducted the first national study on the mental health of fundraisers in France. Nearly 500 professionals participated. While the survey is not statistically representative of the entire profession, the results provide an important snapshot of how fundraisers are living and working today and highlight issues that deserve greater attention across Europe. The findings are both concerning and revealing.

More than half of respondents reported high or very high levels of stress. Nearly two thirds said they had experienced burnout or come close to burnout during their career. More than half had seriously considered leaving their job within the previous twelve months. Managers appeared particularly exposed, reporting even higher levels of stress and burnout.

These figures should not be interpreted simply as individual vulnerabilities. They point to broader structural realities affecting the fundraising profession.

Fundraising has always involved a degree of pressure. Professionals work in environments where resources are limited and needs are growing. They are expected to secure income, build relationships, demonstrate impact and contribute to organisational sustainability. In recent years, however, this pressure has intensified.

Economic uncertainty, inflation, changing donor expectations and increasing competition for funding have created more demanding conditions. In our survey, respondents frequently cited declining resources, higher fundraising targets and concerns about their organisations’ long-term viability as significant sources of stress. For many fundraisers, the challenge is no longer simply to grow income. It is to compensate for shrinking resources elsewhere in the organisation while facing growing expectations from leadership and boards.

At the same time, the issue is not only about funding.

The way fundraising work is organised also matters. Respondents reported that last-minute requests, short-term priorities overriding strategic thinking, and growing administrative requirements contribute significantly to workplace pressure. Many fundraisers find themselves caught between ambitious expectations and limited capacity. They know what should be done strategically but struggle to find the time, resources or organisational support to do it.

One particularly striking result concerns the relationship fundraisers have with their work.

The survey suggests that fundraisers care deeply about what they do. Many remain highly committed to the missions they serve and find meaning in their work. This commitment is undoubtedly one of the profession’s greatest strengths. However, it can also become a source of vulnerability.

People who care strongly about their work often find it difficult to disconnect. They frequently absorb the responsibility of organisational challenges as personal responsibility. They may continue working despite exhaustion because they believe their cause cannot afford for them to stop.

The survey reflects this reality. Large numbers of respondents reported thinking about work outside working hours and struggling to switch off mentally. Many reported working despite being significantly affected by stress. Yet relatively few had taken sick leave related to their mental health.

This raises an important question. If people continue delivering despite high stress levels, how visible does the problem become to leaders?

A profession can appear resilient while simultaneously becoming exhausted. Perhaps the most encouraging finding from the study is that solutions exist. Respondents whose organisations offered a greater number of support measures generally reported lower levels of stress. Flexible working arrangements, remote working opportunities and respect for the right to disconnect appear to make a positive difference. At the same time, significant gaps remain. Many fundraisers reported that wellbeing is rarely discussed directly with managers, and a substantial proportion do not feel comfortable discussing their difficulties.

This suggests that improving mental health in fundraising is not simply about introducing wellbeing programmes. It is about culture.

Creating healthier fundraising environments requires organisations to recognise that wellbeing is a strategic issue rather than a personal one. It affects retention, performance, creativity, decision-making and ultimately fundraising effectiveness itself.

Leaders can play an important role by setting realistic expectations, clarifying priorities, encouraging strategic focus and creating spaces where challenges can be discussed without stigma. Boards also have a responsibility to ensure that fundraising targets are aligned with available resources and organisational capacity.

The fundraising profession itself has an equally important role to play.

For many years, conversations about fundraising have focused primarily on techniques, channels, innovation and performance. These topics remain essential. But we must also create space to discuss the people behind the results.

• How do we make fundraising careers sustainable?
• How do we support professionals through increasingly complex environments?
• How do we ensure that commitment does not become self-sacrifice?
• How do we help managers lead teams while protecting their own wellbeing?

These are questions that deserve wider discussion across our sector.

The findings from France are unlikely to be unique. Similar pressures can be observed throughout Europe and beyond. While organisational contexts differ, many of the challenges faced by fundraisers are shared: rising expectations, limited resources, increasing complexity and a deep commitment to mission.

The good news is that mental health is no longer a taboo subject. More organisations are beginning to recognise its importance, and more professionals are willing to speak openly about their experiences.

This study should be seen not as a diagnosis of a problem specific to France but as an invitation to a broader conversation. Fundraisers help organisations change the world. To do that effectively over the long term, they need environments that allow them not only to perform but also to thrive.

Taking care of fundraisers is not separate from achieving impact. It is one of the conditions that makes impact possible.

Read the AFF’s summary of the study here, and the key findings in EFA’s news story here. 

Yaële Aferiat

CFRE International is conducting research to better understand the experiences and perspectives of fundraising professionals across the sector. This includes how they view professional certification, career development, and employer recognition, including what influences their decision to pursue credentials such as CFRE Certification. The findings will help shape its next strategic plan and future research priorities.

All fundraising professionals are encouraged to participate. CFRE wants to hear from fundraisers at every career stage, including current and former CFREs, those pursuing certification, and those who have never considered it.

The survey takes approximately 15 minutes to complete. Participation is voluntary and a separate, optional section asks about compensation and career experiences. Findings will be reported in aggregate.

The survey closes on 6 November at 12pm ET (6pm CET). Take part here.

The Forum is on 19 November, in Leuven, Belgium. EFA’s annual European gathering for fundraisers and fundraising leaders, it provides a space to exchange on strategy, leadership, civic space and the future of fundraising and philanthropy in Europe.

The event is followed by a networking dinner the same evening. EFA’s Annual General Assembly, member workshop and Board meeting take place on 20 November – for EFA members only.

Fundraisers and fundraising leaders attending the Forum will hear how regulation, technology, and shifting civic space are reshaping fundraising and philanthropy in Europe, and engage in peer exchange on strategy, purpose, impact, and long-term sustainability — beyond operational tactics.

Attendees will also gain early insight into emerging giving models and sector-wide trends affecting future fundraising strategies, and have the opportunity to connect with European peers shaping standards, policy, and professional practice in fundraising.

Forum sessions on 19 November include:

• Political philosophy on fundraising in times of shrinking space for civil society with Ilja De Coster, Supporting Fundraising, and Fundraisers Belgium
• Shrinking civil space in Europe: countering polarisation through positive narratives with Ruth Williams, Fundraising Verband Austria
• Life after the Meta ad ban: how five European sections of Amnesty International adapted to the new reality, with David Conway, Amnesty International GB
• Scaling generosity data: from pilots to a European Commons with Birce Altay, GivingTuesday Europe Hub
• Engaging with public authorities: what lessons for philanthropy and fundraising in Europe?, with Laurence Lepetit, France générosités, and EFA vice president
• Testing our fundraising intuition against the evidence, with Vuk Vuković, KU Leuven
• If you want to change the world, do you really need a charity to do it? with Ian MacQuillin, Rogare
• Roundtable: Unlocking U.S. philanthropy: new sources of support For European nonprofits with Suzana Erickson, Myriad USA

Click here for more information and to register

This year, the Forum is supported by Postcode Lottery Group as Main Partner, Myriad USA and The Fund Raising School as Partners, and Mindwize as Sponsor.

A big thank you for their invaluable support, which helps EFA both to deliver this event and expand our reach to even more fundraisers globally, and to Fundraisers Belgium for hosting us.

About the EFA European Fundraising Forum partners and sponsors

Postcode Lottery Group sets up and operates charity lotteries, which raise funding to support initiatives working for a healthier, fairer, greener world – from local grassroots charities to large international NGOs. Through lotteries operating in the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, Germany, and Norway, players have raised €15.5bn so far for goods causes and social initiatives, with Postcode Lottery Group’s charity partners receiving €1bn in 2025 alone – funding they can use wherever it is needed most.

Myriad USA provides donors with a simple and efficient platform to support nonprofit initiatives overseas, anywhere across the globe. Myriad USA’s work is built on the belief that local knowledge counts, and driven by the desire to improve the lives of people around the world. In 2025, it facilitated a record $195 million in grants to 1,075 nonprofits across 103 countries.

The Fund Raising School, at the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, provides a research-based framework for fundraising success by bridging the gap between theory and practical nonprofit application. Its curriculum is designed to grow your organizational impact through ethical practices, and is built on original data and proven methodologies, ensuring that every strategy is evidence-based and tailored to the evolving philanthropic landscape. 

Mindwize is an international fundraising agency, headquartered in the Netherlands, and has been helping charities grow for more than 30 years. Mindwize works with more than 70 fundraising specialists across the Netherlands, Germany, France, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Austria and Denmark, helping charities build powerfully effective fundraising programmes.