What changes in funding mean for civil society’s work, independence and voice
Findings from an EU SEE and CIVICUS Survey of civil society organisations’ funding experiences (October 2026)
Executive Summary
Net official Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) fell by 23.3% in 2025. This is the largest annual decline on record and it is projected to fall by a further 6.9% in 2026, to its lowest level since 2015. This report draws on survey responses from 195 civil society organisations (CSOs) in at least 68 countries, reached through EU SEE and CIVICUS in August-September 2026, to show what funding cuts and changing donor practices mean in practice for civil society’s work, independence and voice.
A funding shock is made worse by deteriorating funding terms. Three-quarters of respondents (76%) say their funding is lower than it has been over the past decade, and 34% say that more than half of their budget has been affected since January 2025, threatening their survival. In addition, 86% have experienced disruptions including more complicated compliance or non-renewals, reductions, and cancellations of grants since January 2025, making funding relationships more strained. Around three in five say requirements have become heavier, while flexible and core funding have become scarcer.
Diversification of funding streams alone may not provide protection from a system-wide shock. Mid-sized organisations among those surveyed appear to be hit the hardest. Despite having the most diversified funding history, 63% of them report that more than a quarter of their budget has been affected, compared with 52% of larger and 38% of smaller organisations.
What is being lost goes beyond programmes and jobs; it translates into reduced voice, reach and autonomy. 59% report posts eliminated or left vacant, and the same share report reductions in salaries, working hours or benefits. Almost half of those surveyed report reduced advocacy capacity; around 40% have become less vocal or reduced their reach, and around one-third report less autonomy over priorities.
Funding insecurity and shrinking civic space intersect and appear to reinforce one another. Almost two-thirds say civil society work has become less safe since early 2025, and more than half report increased scrutiny, harassment or legal and administrative restrictions to their work and on receiving foreign funding. Human rights and democracy work is seen as the most compromised, along with advocacy focused initiatives.
Adaptation is widespread but mostly defensive coping rather than indicative of recovery. Scaling down programmes is the most common response, and only 29% of respondents have managed to diversify their funding. Spreading staff more thinly across multiple functions has been part of adapting yet threatens long term recovery and impact. Networks and coalitions provide vital support, but cannot replace lost income.
The crisis facing civil society is about more than declining funding. It is also eroding relationships, trust and credibility between donors and CSOs, and it is affecting the independence, autonomy and voice of civil society. At the same time, civic space is contracting and organisations are facing growing legal, political and operational restrictions.
Recommendations call on donors to protect continuity before disruption becomes irreversible, make compliance proportionate to context and risk, defend independent voice and politically contested work and improve national civil society’s access to resources and decisions. Survey respondents call on governments to protect access to funding, participation and civic freedoms enabling civil society to act. Finally, civil society networks and actors are asked to resource collective support, share legal and technical assistance, collective advocacy and early warning.
