According to the , one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but are not making enough to pay for food. The price of the goods and services tracked by Statistics Canada in the Consumer Price Index was up by 2.8% over the 2025 Index – reflecting the struggle to afford the basics. Food Banks Canada has tracked the surge in demand over the last five years – now, food bank visits are double what they were in 2020.

The charitable sector is a reliable partner for government and business, but especially during an affordability crisis. In 2026, food banks and thousands of other charities are helping more Canadians than ever. Canadian charities are responding to the affordability crisis in three ways: free programs to hundreds and thousands of Canadians, a trusted workforce with lived experience to lead programs and services, and the collaborative hub model to make programs more accessible.

Open Arms and Free Programs

The scale and reach of free and subsidized services offered by Canadian charities is impressive. In March 2026, nearly half of the charities surveyed (46%) by Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP) provide all – or nearly all – of their services free of charge, with 73% offering at least one free program in the last year. The types of free or subsidized resources include food, transportation, childcare, youth activities, spiritual support, therapy, retraining, tax filing, events, deeply affordable rent, interest-free loans, and more. For example, a quarter of the charities (27%) provide financial aid or vouchers to their clients. These free and subsidized programs help clients make life more manageable ().

Charities offer trusted services in local communities that partners in government and business cannot  provide. A third of charities (33%) help people access and navigate the public benefit systems from governments because for clients with health issues or language barriers, applying for social services requires support. With social capital and trust from community members, charities can be interlocutors for government (CICP 4.03.08).

Canadians are using these free and subsidized services at significant rates. Half of the participating CICP charities (roughly 55%) served up to 1,000 people in the last 12 months, while 5% of organizations had the capacity to serve more than ten thousand clients, and 2% of charities impressively served more than 25,000 clients. Canadians turn to these programs and services for cost-relief and for community connection. One CICP panellist asserted that, “strengthening the charitable sector’s role in addressing affordability is essential, as these organizations provide not only immediate cost relief for families but also generate long-term public cost savings and enhance social and community stability.” In other words, programs and services from charities build social cohesion (CICP 4.03.08).

Mission-driven Workforce with Lived Experience

Charities benefit from a highly educated and mission-driven labour pool. The CICP recently released a briefing note examining this skilled workforce. The charitable workforce grasps the barriers clients face because they’ve lived them – 70% report staff with direct lived experience (. There is no substitute for lived experience when it comes to compassionate care. For example, panellists emphasized the significance of reducing barriers – like offering transportation or childcare – for people to feel at ease when participating in charitable programs (CICP 4.03.08).

Staff with lived experience are an incredible asset for charities. Canadian charities stated that their greatest strengths include a strong relevance to community needs (67%) and their skilled, committed staff (56%) (). Despite low job security and salaries, staff stay because of a passion for the work (78%), and an alignment with the mission and values of their organization (77%) (). Canadian charities recognize their workforce as community experts and trusted insiders whose local knowledge and lived experience drive the organization’s impact.

Collaborative Service Hubs

With an impressive reach into every Canadian community, the charitable sector can support Canadians with the affordability crisis by making services easily available. Collaborative hubs are reducing barriers and building social cohesion. A community service hub houses multiple organizations who deliver community services such as the East Scarborough Storefront with 30 partner groups, operated by MakeWay. In 2024, 79% of charities surveyed by the CICP agreed that greater collaboration among charities could improve outcomes for the people they serve ().  By 2025, participating CICP charities reported investing in shared program delivery (20%), and/or shared office space (17%), and/or shared administrative services (12%) (). Although collaboration is more difficult outside of urban areas, the desire for charities to collaborate and build social cohesion continues to grow.

Conclusion

Charities help with affordability by offering free programs, by employing compassionate staff with lived experience, and by collaborating on service delivery, when possible. But charities also have to deal with the same economic pressures as the rest of us, such as inflation and the rising price of gas. For example, more than half of participating CICP charities reported that the cost of their materials and services have increased (43% increased, 12% major increase). Simultaneously, a large percentage of these organizations have also experienced an increase (39%) or major increase (16%) in the demand for their services (). Increased demand, like that documented by Food Banks Canada, indicates the critical role that charities play in the economy. During an affordability crisis, charities across the country are doing the heavy lifting to help Canadians.

Author

Cornell, Kate

• Senior Advisor, Strategic Communications
• Email Kate

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Allies in Affordability appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within this outlier group, self-reported commitment to DEI remains relatively high. This contradiction raises questions about how DEI is being understood, practiced, and measured across the Canadian charitable sector.

In 2024, the CICP conducted two surveys: one on DEI implementation and another on DEI actions and initiatives. This analysis draws on a cross-comparison of those surveys and focuses on a subgroup of charities that report no DEI policies or practices but do indicate a commitment to DEI integration or values. These organizations are drawn from a broader sample of approximately 1,000 charities participating weekly in the project. As this analysis is exploratory and based on a small subset of survey panellists, findings should be interpreted with caution and point to the need for further research.

Commitment without Documentation

Among charities reporting no DEI policies or practices, nonetheless, nearly half describe DEI as either fully integrated into their work (24.5%) or present in some aspects of operations (24.5%). An additional 14.5% say DEI is reflected in organizational values, even if it has not been translated into concrete action. In contrast, 12% report limited or no formal commitment, 15% say they are not actively pursuing DEI, and 9% are unsure.

These findings suggest that values-based or informal understandings of DEI are common, even in the absence of formal structures. At the same time, they raise an important question: what does integration mean when it is not accompanied by policies, practices, or evaluation mechanisms?

What characterizes these Charities?

(‘Not pursuing DEI’ and ‘Not sure’ responses removed, leaving a sample of 130 charities.)

These organizations are not concentrated at the margins of the sector. Most are smaller  charities, with 68.5% reporting annual expenditures between approximately $61,500 and $791,500, though both smaller and larger organizations are also represented.

Overall, the absence of DEI policies appears to be a cross-cutting phenomenon, not easily explained by organizational size or charitable mission. By subsector, charities relieving poverty account for the largest share (37.5%), followed by public amenities (17.5%) and community resource organizations (11%), but these types of charities are also the largest share of the CICP survey population. All other types of charities are also represented in this subsample, including religious, arts, health care, and animal welfare organizations.

Minimal Measurement, but some Action

Despite stating that they do not have DEI policies or practices, 16% of these charities report taking specific DEI-related actions in the past 12 months. Reported actions include reviewing compensation and benefits for equity (7%), increasing outreach to underrepresented communities (4.5%), revising marketing, outreach, or program materials (2%), and implementing inclusive hiring practices (2%). One organization reported establishing an EDI committee or working group, and another noted setting EDI-related goals or targets. This points to a possible lack of understanding in how DEI policies and practices are defined and understood by some charities.

Measurement of DEI initiatives is also rare among these charities. Nearly 80% say they do not currently measure the effectiveness of DEI initiatives. Tools such as surveys (4.5%), focus groups (4%), or key performance indicators (1.5%) are infrequently used. Comments by survey panellist suggest that DEI is viewed as implicit or self-evident – rather than as something requiring deliberate implementation or evaluation. As one respondent put it, inclusivity is “naturally present.” And another stated, the “organisation is organically inclusive and formalisation is not a priority.”

Capacity Constraints – not Resistance to DEI

Yet, the data do not indicate internal resistance to DEI. Only 12% cite resistance to change as a barrier. Instead, challenges are more often structural, with 44% citing a lack of resources as a barrier to implementing DEI practices. When asked specifically what supports would help advance DEI initiatives, the top responses were financial resources (21.5%), training and workshops (21.5%), time and capacity (19%), and consulting or expert guidance (14.5%). Only 13% say they require no help to implement DEI initiatives.

Some respondents noted operating with only one or two staff, while other responding charities described being entirely volunteer-driven. These resource constraints may help explain why formal measurement lags behind organizational values.

More Research needed into these outlier Charities

Taken together, this subsample analysis reveals that some charities appear to equate DEI initiatives with fairness, neutrality, or openness, rather than with structured practices or measurable outcomes. This data does not suggest that DEI is irrelevant to these outlier organizations, rather it does indicate a need for deeper examination of how effective DEI initiatives are when there is no formalization or measurement of effectiveness.

Author

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, and navigate complex digital environments more efficiently. The Charity Insights Canada Project’s survey on indicates that charities recognize the importance of using data well, yet some struggle to access the skills and tools. Although digital tools are now part of everyday nonprofit work, gaps in resources, training, and confidence prevent organizations from fully benefiting from them. The insights shared by survey participants help explain why these gaps persist and why building data literacy is a priority for the sector.

Data Literacy begins with digital tools

Using digital tools regularly, like spreadsheets and surveys, is an important part of digital literacy. In October 2025, hundreds of charities across Canada shared how they use digital tools, where they face barriers, and what training they need to strengthen their digital readiness.

Charities are using digital tools, but they have little time and budget to become proficient.

Most organizations report using digital technologies to some extent, but few feel they are using them to their full potential.

• 63% say they moderately use technologies and digital tools, with room for improvement
• Only 13% report fully utilizing available digital tools
• 16% say they are exploring the use of tools

This reflects a sector in transition, willing to adopt technologies and digital tools but needing to spend time to improve their skills.

Digital and data skills are rising priorities

A large majority of charities (68%) told us that digital skills are becoming a higher priority for their organizations. This shift highlights the essential role of technical capacity in operational sustainability and service delivery.

Data literacy is the top digital skill needed

Which digital skills are most important for charities to develop? When asked, the top answer, selected by 69% of respondents, was collecting, managing, and analyzing data. Another 53% named using data to inform decision-making and strategy. These responses reinforce a clear message: many charities want to make data-informed decisions but need the foundational skills to get there.

Sector-wide barriers: staffing and funding

Charities want to strengthen their digital capacity, yet many respondents pointed to limited financial and staffing capacity as a major barrier:

• 72% agree that financial constraints impede their ability to improve digital tools
• 70% agree that limited human resources is a barrier to improving digital skills.

In comments, panellists shared that even when the benefits of digital tools are clear, the cost of purchasing software, maintaining licenses, or hiring technical help often prevents them from moving forward. The financial pressures limit an organization’s ability to invest in data systems, adopt new technologies, or train staff to use the tools they already have. In the words of one panellist: “We don’t have the money to invest in digital tools and infrastructure, or in the additional staff we would need to develop it.” The sector sees the value of digital skills, but budgets and capacity are still significant barriers.

CICP Efforts to Build Sector Capacity

To help address these gaps, the CICP is be providing free data literacy webinars through our Community Education Centre, designed specifically for nonprofit and charitable workers. Our webinars introduce sector workers to the basics of collecting, storing and interpreting data, asking effective questions of their data, and using information ethically and confidently. These sessions are built for people who may be new to data.

These webinars focus on tools organizations already have, such as Google and Excel spreadsheets. The webinars are designed to give staff practical techniques they can apply immediately, even in resource-constrained environments.

Why Strengthening Data Literacy Matters

Stronger data literacy supports organizations in:

• making clearer, more evidence-based decisions
• allocating resources where they will have the biggest impact
• communicating results to funders, boards, and communities
• identifying service gaps and equity issues
• navigating an increasingly digital funding and policy environment

The findings from our technology adoption research show that charities across Canada want to work with data more confidently and effectively, yet many face ongoing challenges that limit what is possible in their day-to-day operations.  The CICP Community Education Centre webinars are designed to help participants build confidence with data in manageable ways that align with the realities of their workload. By creating space for practical learning within reach for many organizations, we hope to contribute to the larger ongoing efforts to improve data literacy across the sector.

Author

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

In Canada’s charitable sector, “impact” has become a buzzword. It is embedded in grant applications, strategic plans, and funder conversations as a signal of seriousness and accountability. Driven by well-intentioned demands from donors and funders, organizations are increasingly pressured to prove the profound, long-term change they create. However, data from the Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP) reveal a significant gap between what funders expect and what organizations can realistically deliver.

Confusion in the Language of Evaluation

A significant hurdle is the inconsistent use of terminology. In evaluation practice, outputs, outcomes, and impact are distinct. Outputs describe the direct product of activities, such as “the number of workshops delivered”. Outcomes capture the short-to-medium term changes for participants, such as “improved knowledge or skills”. Impact, by contrast, refers to broader and longer-term systemic change, for example “reduction in unemployment rates”.

In practice, however, these distinctions are often blurred. Reviewing evaluation reports in Canada and elsewhere, found that nonprofits frequently equate “impact evaluation” with simpler measures such as outputs or outcomes. As one CICP panellist expressed, “Not sure how to measure impact and outcomes other than collecting numbers of participants and some qualitative feedback from participants.” () Therefore, it is important to discern: are Canadian organizations evaluating impact or counting outputs.

Findings from the CICP: Are Charities Truly Measuring “Impact”?

At its core, seeks to determine whether an intervention causes a particular outcome. It relies on counterfactual or quasi-experimental designs that compare what happened with what would have happened without the intervention in order to isolate causality.  

CICP findings show that most evaluation in the sector focuses on monitoring and learning, not causal proof. While 81 % of charities say they measure impact in some form (), only 8% conduct evaluations using counterfactual methods – the methodological standard for establishing causation (. Most charities rely on self-designed questionnaires (50%) and recorded outputs or outcomes (around 50%), rather than externally validated tools from government (10%) or researchers (8%) ().

These patterns reveal that charities are indeed evaluating, but primarily to learn, improve, and remain accountable to their missions, but not to prove causality. Similar observations have been reported in earlier sector studies, including and .

The question, then, is whether the push for “impact” has outpaced the sector’s actual capacity, and even its purpose.

A Cautionary Tale from the “Impact Revolution” in the US and the UK

Experiences in the United States and the United Kingdom offer a cautionary lesson. In the 2000s, charities were encouraged to measure and publish their own impact. Reflecting later on this “impact revolution,” philanthropy advisors acknowledged that this practice backfired because the system was stacked against producing reliable evidence.

Fiennes argues that expecting charities to conduct rigorous impact evaluations is often unrealistic. Organizations may feel pressure to present flattering results, or what calls “vanity metrics.” Many charities also lack the methodological expertise, financial resources, and sample sizes needed for rigorous evaluation. In short, charities are experts in delivering services, not necessarily in conducting causal social science research.

Rethinking What Counts as Evaluation

If rigorous experimental impact evaluations are not feasible for most charities, what does meaningful evaluation look like instead.

Research by Phillips and Carlan suggests that evaluation may be more productive when centered on learning, reflection, and adaptation. Several approaches reflect this shift. For example, developmental and participatory evaluation support innovation by helping organizations adapt their programs as conditions evolve. Developmental and participatory evaluation involve staff, communities, and sometimes funders in defining what success looks like. Collective approaches, where funders and grantees jointly design learning frameworks, can better align expectations with the realities of organizational capacity. Utilization-focused evaluation, meanwhile, prioritizes the practical use of findings so organizations can adjust programs and make decisions in real time.

Concluding remarks

The bottom line is that evaluation should ultimately be about learning, not just compliance. For charities, this means listening closely to clients, making better use of their own data, and drawing on high-quality external research rather than trying to produce impact studies on their own. But meaningful evaluation also requires resources. Funders therefore have a critical role to play, not only by investing in independent evaluations that can serve as public goods, but also by supporting the learning-oriented evaluation activities that charities undertake as part of their everyday work.

Author

Nguyen, Thi Kim Quy

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Thi Kim Quy

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Measuring What Matters: Rethinking Impact Evaluation appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

The CICP’s analysis of its first survey of 2025 captured a charitable sector caught in the cross-currents of economic instability, political uncertainty, and escalating community need. Financial anxiety was widespread, optimism had softened, and leaders described the moment bluntly: “It’s just madness.” Yet even amid this turbulence, charities remained steadfast in their commitment to supporting communities.

With the release of the CICP’s final survey of 2025, which focused on charities’ planning for 2026, we are now able to examine how priorities and expectations have shifted over time. This analysis draws on three survey points: early 2024 (CICP 2.01.01, January 2024), early 2025 (CICP 3.02.1, February 2025), and late 2025 (CICP 3.11.40, November 2025). Across these data, three emerging trends stand out: renewed optimism, a strengthening focus on services and engagement, and persistent workforce instability. Together, they point to a notable shift in how Canadian charities are entering 2026.

Optimism Is Making a Comeback

Against a backdrop of economic uncertainty, a combined 77% of organizations report feeling “very optimistic” (21%) or “somewhat optimistic” (56%) about their prospects for 2026. This marks the highest level of optimism in three years, surpassing the 71% reported in early 2025 and 76% in early 2024. The most striking shift was the increase in those identifying as “very optimistic,” which nearly doubled from 11% in early 2025 to 21% for 2026.

The rebound in optimism suggests that although charities expect 2026 to bring continued economic challenges, they are entering the year with greater confidence in their capacity to navigate uncertainty.

Strengthening Services and Community Engagement

While financial health remains the undisputed top priority for 66% of participating charities, other leading priorities indicate a notable shift in operations towards what charities can control. The importance of delivering programs & services has risen to its highest point in three years, cited by 55% of organizations, up from 50% in 2025 and 48% in 2024. Similarly, “community outreach/engagement” was reported as a significantly higher priority for 2026 (38%) than it was in 2024 (29%).

In an environment of uncertainty, this is a calculated choice: charities are focusing on the assets they can control and strengthen. The renewed emphasis on essential programs/services and community engagement reflects organizations’ core strategy for building stability.

Focus on the Sustainability of the Workforce

While financial instability remains a top challenge for 65% of organizations, workforce sustainability has emerged as a defining pressure point for the sector. Charities report persistent challenges related to increasing demand for services (36%), staff or volunteer burnout (34%), recruitment and retention of staff (31%), and recruitment and retention of volunteers (25%).

The greatest risk facing charities is no longer solely a volatile funding environment, but the long-term sustainability of the sector’s workforce. Efforts to strengthen internal supports, such as extended health benefits, flexible work arrangements, and improved communication, are increasingly viewed as essential to maintaining service quality and organizational resilience.

Tracking Priorities

As charities enter 2026, many are prioritizing the assets they can most directly influence: programs and services, community engagement, and workforce support. While funding uncertainty remains a constant backdrop, the sector’s rebounding optimism reflects a deep well of resilience.

As one respondent observed:

The CICP will continue to track these trends closely as charities navigate 2026, monitoring how optimism, priorities, and pressures evolve across the Canadian charitable sector.

Author

Nguyen, Thi Kim Quy

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Thi Kim Quy

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Setting Priorities, Building Strength: How Charities Are Entering 2026 appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

In a recent blog, we explored the deepening HR crisis in Canada’s charitable sector, drawing on data from the Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP). Between 2023 and 2024, turnover rates among employees surged, driven by low pay, burnout, and systemic underfunding. One year later, new data from 2025 suggests a more positive shift, though not necessarily a resolution.

Turnover Trends: A Notable Improvement

In 2024, 39% of charities reported high turnover (defined as more than 20% of staff leaving), up from 27% in 2023. However, the 2025 data show a significant drop to 20%. At the same time, the proportion of organizations reporting no turnover rose from 21% in 2024 to 35% in 2025, while those experiencing low turnover increased slightly from 41% to 45%. This data represents a notable slowing of turnover at charitable organizations.

(Excludes ‘Not applicable’ and ‘Not sure’ responses)

Concerns Remain: Recruitment Still Difficult

Despite the improvement in turnover rates, employers in the sector are still concerned about workforce stability, particularly around staff departures and recruitment challenges.

Anxiety about turnover is still present: 36.5% of charities reported being somewhat concerned, and 18.5% were very concerned about staff departures. This reflects ongoing anxiety about losing experienced personnel and the impact it can have on organizational continuity.
(Excludes ‘Not applicable’ and ‘Not sure’ responses)

Recruitment difficulty is a separate but equally pressing issue: 36% of charities said hiring new staff was somewhat difficult, while 19% found it very difficult. These figures suggest that even as turnover slows, finding the time and money to replace staff remains a significant hurdle.

As one organization reported:

Retention remains the goal because recruitment is competitive.

Why Are Employees Leaving?

The top reasons for employee turnover are consistent with previous CICP surveys: low remuneration and benefits, and burnout from overwhelming workloads. Notably, one panellist recognized their organization’s situation within the sector:

Many charities serve as stepping stones for early-career professionals who leave for more secure, better-paying roles. This comment highlights the need for long-term investment in staffing, organizational capacity, and sector-wide solutions. One panellist explains their staff model:

Unstable funding often forces organizations to rely on short-term contracts, prompting employees to seek more secure permanent employment elsewhere.

Why Do Employees Stay?

Despite the challenges, some staff remain at supportive workplaces in part because of their commitment to the work. We received positive comments from several organizations:

Looking Ahead

With the slowing of the turnover, the 2025 data offers cautious optimism. But the HR crisis in the charitable sector is far from over. Recruitment difficulties, ongoing burnout, and systemic funding challenges continue to threaten the sector’s sustainability. And the passion for making a difference should not be a substitute for fair compensation and decent working conditions. As one panellist states: “Passion for the cause will not pay bills.”

Charities are the heart of community support in Canada, and their workers are the backbone of these organizations. Addressing turnover and recruitment challenges is not just a matter of operational efficiency; it’s about ensuring that organizations can continue to deliver essential services to communities across the country.

The CICP will continue to track employee turnover and workforce trends, providing data-driven insights to support policy, funding, and strategic planning across the charitable landscape.

Author

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post From Crisis to Caution? Tracking Turnover appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

A Growing Conversation ĐÓ°ÉÔ­ŽŽ AI in the Sector

As charities adapt to a rapidly changing world, their relationship with technology, especially AI, has become increasingly more complex. Across three years of survey responses, we’ve heard both enthusiasm and unease: from excitement about streamlined operations to serious concerns about losing the human touch, copyright infringement, and environmental impact of AI (; ; ; ).

To help deepen our collective understanding, let’s turn to a powerful philosophical voice from one of the greatest thinkers of the 20^th century: Ernst Cassirer, whose essay explores what technology is, and what it means for our spirit, culture, and humanity. His insights may offer us a language to think more clearly about the ethical and cultural questions AI poses – not just whether it works, but whether it works for us.

Technology as “Form”

Before we can evaluate technology, Cassirer argues, we must understand its essence – its forma formans, the inner idea that gives rise to its “form” – rather than only reacting to its visible outcomes (forma formata), or its “being”. He cautions against reducing technology to utility, and challenges us to see it instead as an expression of culture, spirit, and creativity – akin to Plato’s view of techne as guided by archetypes rather than mere imitation.

Cassirer doesn’t see technology merely as a tool or a set of inventions, but as a new way of shaping meaning – a cultural force with the power to transform how we relate to nature, to others, and to ourselves. He reminds us that even the most powerful technologies remain human achievements. They reflect our hopes, our fears, and our ideals. Thus, AI is not simply a new tool; it is a new chapter in the story of human meaning-making.

Key Conflicts Triggered by the Rise of Technology

Reading Cassirer today offers a powerful lens for reflecting on AI. He outlines three key conflicts that arise as technology becomes more central to modern life – conflicts that can help us understand the concerns many charities have about AI’s growing presence.

The Conflict Between Happiness and Technological Will

The first conflict, according to Cassirer, is that technology promises mastery over nature – but it also imposes its own laws, efficiency-driven logics, and utilitarian demands. As we use this technology, we risk losing the “organic unity” of existence – that sense of life as meaningful beyond output.

In the context of AI, this conflict plays out when charities adopt tools that save time or streamline tasks, but begin to question whether these gains serve their missions. Does using AI to write a grant proposal free up time for human connection – or distance us from it? Does automating a donor appeal improve engagement – or flatten it into formula?

These difficult questions point to the fact that technology, as Cassirer warns, can reframe our sense of what matters.

The Conflict Between Technological and Artistic Creation

Cassirer’s second insight distinguishes between technological work – which solves problems through precise design – and artistic creation, which merges form with deep inner expression. Both kinds of work require discipline and imagination. But art, for Cassirer, speaks from and to the soul. Unlike technology, its beauty is expressive, not just functional.

This distinction comes alive when charities raise concerns about AI-generated art or music. While generative AI can compose poems, design posters, or simulate voices, does it express anything truly human? One might say that technological creation builds, while artistic creation reveals.

For mission-driven organizations – especially those working in arts, culture, or education – this isn’t just philosophical. It goes to the heart of what they do. Can a chatbot teach empathy? Can a machine-generated story carry the same meaning for youth in crisis? These aren’t arguments against AI, but reminders of what must not be lost.

Freedom vs. Bondage: The Deepest Paradox of Our Time

Finally, Cassirer urges us to ask the most serious question: not what technology can do, but what it ought to do. He warns that when technology becomes untethered from ethical purpose, it risks serving consumption over conscience.

Here, his words resonate powerfully with some of the environmental and social concerns raised by charities in our survey. AI systems, especially large models, have a large carbon footprint and require massive resources. Are these tools being developed and deployed in ways that serve the public good? Are their benefits equitably distributed?

Cassirer is clear: technology must fit into a larger moral horizon – one guided by values like justice, solidarity, and care. And it is precisely this ethical orientation that charities bring to the conversation.

Toward “Freedom Through Bondage”

Cassirer calls the ideal of technological culture “freedom through bondage.” We obey natural laws, learn from constraints, and in doing so, discover new possibilities. But the freedom we gain is not automatic. It must be cultivated  – through reflection, ethics, and the collective will to use technology responsibly.

Charities have a unique role to play in the scrutiny of technology. Their work is not driven by profit but by purpose. Their accountability is not only to stakeholders but to communities. Charities’ everyday decisions – about adopting AI or opposing its use in certain circumstances – offer a kind of moral barometer for our digital age.

Author

Nguyen, Thi Kim Quy

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Thi Kim Quy

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Technology, Human Spirit, and the Ethics of Progress: Charities and AI appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

The Charity Insights Canada Project has been conducting weekly surveys of Canadian charities to gain insight into the operational realities they face. One of the clearest patterns to emerge from our 2024 data is: financially stable charities tend to offer better workforce conditions and higher salaries. But that’s only part of the story. Even in the best-case scenarios, many charities with a firm financial footing and no concerns about long-term sustainability still rely on unpaid overtime and face increasing mental health challenges for personnel.

In this analysis, we cross-compare data related to , , , and of staff and volunteers gathered across 2024.

Comparison of Very Stable and Unstable Charities

Among charities that describe themselves as “very financially stable,” nearly half (47%) rely on unpaid overtime. Executive-level staff in these organizations average almost 24 unpaid overtime hours per month, while entry-level staff contribute over nine unpaid hours monthly. Not surprisingly, more than 60% report increasing mental health challenges among staff and volunteers.

The reliance on unpaid labour is even more severe in less stable organizations. Among charities that describe themselves as “very financially unstable,” 72% rely on unpaid overtime. Specifically, executive-level staff provide, on average, 63 hours of unpaid overtime per month, while entry-level staff provide 20 hours of unpaid overtime per month. Not surprisingly, nearly 89% of personnel report rising mental health concerns.

Although salaries are somewhat higher among very financially stable organizations, entry-level positions still only average $46,697, and executive-level average $79,724. reports that average salaries across the nonprofit sector are 13% lower than the average salaries in the economy. When the number of unpaid overtime hours are taken into account, many of these salaries are based on more than full-time hours as stipulated in provincial labour codes. 

Average Full-time Salaries:

(Responses less than $20,000 removed from analysis, as these likely reflected seasonal full-time positions)

The contrast in these salaries underscores a troubling reality: financial instability exacerbates workforce strain, but financial stability at an organization doesn’t guarantee fair working conditions.

Sustainability Must Include People

In the nonprofit sector, sustainability encompasses achieving both financial stability and a charity’s ability to fulfill its mission. But healthy sustainability also includes equitable and safe working conditions for staff and volunteers. A charity that achieves financial stability by relying on underpaid and overworked staff and unpaid overtime is not truly sustainable. These charities are surviving at the expense of their workforce.

As with the financial stability data, our data on long-term sustainability concerns shows that the charities that rate themselves as “not concerned” tend to provide higher salaries than those who are “highly concerned” about their stability – but workforce challenges persist, nonetheless.

Average Full-time Salaries

(Responses less than $20,000 removed from analysis, as these likely reflected seasonal full-time positions)

Among charities that are not concerned about stability, more than half still report unpaid overtime of staff. Entry-level positions provide 12 hours of overtime work on average per month, and executive-level positions provide 32 hours. Nearly 73% of these charities have seen increased mental health challenges among staff and volunteers.

Our findings raise a critical question: If financial stability and confidence in long-term sustainability don’t guarantee fair compensation and healthy working conditions, what else is at play?

Work Culture and Cost-Cutting Myths

The answer may lie in the culture of the charitable sector itself. There is a long-standing belief, often unspoken but deeply ingrained, that work in this sector is a calling rather than a career. That it is a and should be driven by passion, not pay. This dated and gendered mindset can have harmful consequences.

The narrative has led to a reluctance to offer competitive wages. Donors want to see their money go directly to “the cause,” not to the people doing the work. But this is a false dichotomy – there is no delivery of charitable programs and services without the highly-skilled workers in the sector.

It’s Time to Shift the Narrative to Decent Work

Financial stability and sustainability should be a platform for improving, not just maintaining, working conditions. Charities can use this data to advocate for funding that supports decent wages and benefits and to reform how they build their budgets. Funders and donors must recognize that investing in people is investing in impact. And as a sector, we must challenge the workplace cultural norms that devalue labour and normalize burnout.

For more information on decent work policies in the nonprofit sector, check out The Ontario Nonprofit Network’s .

Note: In all cross-comparison analysis above, ‘N/A’ and ‘Not Sure’ responses are excluded

Author

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Stable on Paper, Strained in Practice: The Workforce Crisis in Canadian Charities appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

Since the Covid-19 pandemic, digital technology has dramatically reshaped the fundraising landscape for charities worldwide. estimates that the pandemic accelerated business digital adoption by nearly seven years – a shift that charities cannot afford to ignore.

Our CICP surveys show that digital fundraising is now one of the top needed skills across the Canadian charitable sector, both for new hires () and for existing staff (). Yet implementation still lags behind: just 19% of organizations ran targeted email campaigns, 14% used social media fundraising, and only 5% tried crowdfunding ().

In this post, ·É±đ’l±ô explore how charities can make the most of digital fundraising – even on a tight budget. Drawing on expert advice from (2022), ·É±đ’l±ô highlight key principles that remain timeless in the digital age, practical tactics for various digital platforms, and emerging trends that fundraisers should keep on their radar.

Timeless Fundraising Principles That Also Work Digitally

Even in the digital age, the core principles of effective fundraising haven’t changed – just the ways we deliver them. Here are five best practices that Johnston and West (Canada) recommend: multichannel conversion, audience segmentation, fundraising copyrighting, integrated messaging, and what is in it for me?

These five fundraising principles are evident in these examples:

What’s Ahead for Digital Fundraising and What’s Holding Us Back?

While no one can predict the next big platform or tool, several trends are already reshaping how charities connect with donors – and many organizations are beginning to take notice.

First, smarter use of data is on the horizon. CICP survey reports a growing interest in AI-powered data analysis, which nearly half of Canadian charities (48%) say they would like to explore (). Charities also report that the top future needs for digital transformation include data management, CRM systems, digital marketing, and AI integration (CICP 2.06.23)

Second, automation is gaining momentum. Beyond simple thank-you emails, tools can now run personalized campaigns across email, social media, and websites. Many charities already see the promise of AI and automation in fundraising-related activities such as grant writing and marketing where support rose from 68% in 2023 to 75% in 2024 (; ).

Yet, barriers to digital fundraising remain. Many leadership teams have hesitated to commit to long-term digital strategies: only 11% of Canadian charities report having a digital strategic plan – a stark contrast to 50% in the UK (CICP 2.04.12). Funding limitations affect three-quarters of charities, while skill shortages and lack of training access remain a barrier for 43% (). Our findings confirm what Michael Johnston and Mackenzie West emphasize: the main roadblocks to digital fundraising are not tools, but the skills development and budgetary priorities.

Author

Nguyen, Thi Kim Quy

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Thi Kim Quy

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Digital Fundraising in Canadian Charities: What’s Working, What’s Next, and What’s Holding Us Back appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

At the 2025 Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP) Data Summit, I had the privilege of facilitating the final station of our morning Data Walk, titled “Looking to the Horizon – Where Do We Go From Here?” Summit participants, who are leaders, practitioners, and researchers from across the charitable sector, rotated through six rounds of discussion and engaged deeply with three years of CICP survey data.

What unfolded at my station was less a technical discussion about data and more a heartfelt conversation about the collective desire to move beyond reactive coping and reclaim the sectors sense of spirit, while also recognizing that its true strength and resilience have always come from its human and cultural soul.

The Need to Speak Up with More Clarity and Confidence

No topic stirred stronger emotions than advocacy. The data showed that nearly half of charities say advocacy doesn’t align with their mission, a finding that surprised many. Several participants admitted that this hesitation is due to a mix of institutional barriers, limited capacity, and the lingering “chill” of past government audits, when many organizations avoided public advocacy to protect their charitable status. Others pointed to the fear of alienating funders or donors.

But then came a reframing that shifted the conversation entirely. One participant suggested that perhaps the issue isn’t reluctance: it’s language. They noted that many organizations are doing advocacy; they just call it something else: public education, awareness campaigns, or community development. This observation hinted a way forward where collective examples can help demystify advocacy and show that speaking up is not separate from mission fulfillment but integral to it.

At the same time, participants offered examples of courage and adaptation in their advocacy work. A group working in the environmental space shared how they encourage communities to advocate for clean water at local and provincial levels, integrating policy awareness into service delivery. Another participant described a major food security organization gradually moving from an emergency response model toward a sustained advocacy role through testifying before committees and working to address root causes of hunger.

The Need to Scale Up with More Strategy and Reflection

Another theme that surfaced repeatedly was artificial intelligence (AI). Participants shared experiences that reflected a sector in exploration mode: willing to test, but determined to stay grounded in its values.

There was a recognition of AI’s potential to relieve administrative pressures: automating repetitive tasks, summarizing reports, and freeing staff time for human connection. Some participants shared that their organizations have already begun using AI after receiving targeted training, while others are taking slower, more structured steps. One participant described a policy in her organization requiring staff to seek approval before using tools such as ChatGPT for grant writing or donor outreach as a way of ensuring thoughtful use rather than blind adoption.

Despite these structured beginnings, several participants admitted that digital readiness remains uneven across the sector. One senior leader reflected on their own experience during the early days of personal computers and word processing, recalling how that technological shift split the workforce between those who embraced the change and those who never fully adapted, and suggesting that a similar divide may now be emerging with AI. Another speaker observed that many people don’t know how to properly organize data to make use of available tools. They provided an example of someone who wanted to use AI to fill a contract when the only necessary tool was “network,” a reminder that not every problem requires advanced technology. Knowing what information already exists, organizing it well, and valuing human connections must be considered a part of good data practice.

Participants also noted that AI and ethics have not caught up to technology and that organizations are struggling with weighing the potential damages and consequences against the benefits. One speaker pointed out that AI has already shown bias in settings like doctors’ offices, providing more positive outcomes for men while triggering depression warnings for women with similar symptoms. Another voiced concern that organizations are utilizing AI as a substitute for training and investing into staff. They noted colleagues using AI to fill a skill gap in areas like writing grants and communications, and stated it would be incredible if we could invest more into people.

The Necessity of Collaboration

If there was one connecting thread I found across the six rounds, it was collaboration. Participants who I spoke with, pointed to many encouraging collaborative examples already in motion. Coalitions of gender-based violence shelters, for instance, have formed provincial and national associations that enable members to advocate collectively, share expertise, and pool training resources, achieving far more together than they could alone. Shared service models such as joint training programs and digital helplines also demonstrate how pooling resources can extend high-quality tools and platforms to smaller organizations that might otherwise lack access.

One of the most striking examples came from a foundation that intentionally convened its grantees and policymakers to collaborate directly. This experience offers a glimpse of how new relationships and shared problem-solving can break down long-standing silos. Another participant noted that greater collaboration, and even mergers, can enhance effectiveness and create a more seamless experience for clients, sparing them from navigating countless agencies. Yet there was also recognition that deep cultural and emotional barriers remain, including fears of losing an organization’s distinct mission and identity in the process.

“We’ll Celebrate and Party First!”: Honoring the Sector’s Soul

What stays with me most from the discussion is how deeply the collective desire not only for “spirit” (ambition, confidence, and clarity) but also for “soul” (belonging, mission alignment, and people-centeredness). Again and again, participants spoke of wanting to move beyond constant coping toward long-term vision and collective courage, yet they also reminded one another that the heart of the sector lies in its people, values, and culture. One leader captured this beautifully when asked what action they would take to move their organization toward the future: they said simply, “·É±đ’l±ô party and celebrate first!” That profoundly human message stayed with me. It reminds us that sustainability depends not only on better plans and strategies, but also on the capacity to find joy together, to celebrate what is still strong, and remembering why we began this work in the first place.

Author

Nguyen, Thi Kim Quy

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Thi Kim Quy

Want to receive our blog posts directly to your email?  Sign-up for our newsletter at the following link, and follow us on social-media for regular project updates:

• Newsletter sign up:
• LinkedIn:
• Socials: @CICP_PCPOB

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Allies in Affordability

According to the 2026 Food Banks Poverty Report Card, one in four people in Canada are food insecure and many of them are employed but …

May 28, 2026

When DEI isn’t formalized, but still matters

This cohort stood out in Charity Insights Canada Project data: the charities that report having no diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies or practices. Within …

May 14, 2026

Why Data Literacy Matters More Than Ever for Canada’s Charitable Sector

Data literacy has become a necessary skill across the charitable sector because organizations are being asked to make decisions more quickly, demonstrate impact more clearly, …

The post Embracing Spirit and Soul: Reflections from the 2025 CICP Data Walk appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.