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.

Pour de nombreux organismes de bienfaisance, la rĂ©daction de demandes de subventions est devenue plus difficile, plus longue et moins viable, mĂȘme si elle reste essentielle Ă  leur survie. Mais une menĂ©e par le Projet Canada Perspectives des Organismes de Bienfaisance (PCPOB) rĂ©vĂšle plus que les obstacles habituels. L’enquĂȘte montre oĂč des progrĂšs sont rĂ©alisĂ©s et ce qui fonctionne. Certaines organisations amĂ©liorent leurs chances en investissant dans les ressources humaines, en utilisant des outils plus intelligents et en Ă©tablissant des relations plus solides avec les bailleurs de fonds. NĂ©anmoins, la majoritĂ© d’entre elles sont Ă  bout de souffle, confrontĂ©es Ă  de faibles taux de rĂ©ussite et Ă  des exigences administratives Ă©levĂ©es.

Aperçu de la rédaction de demandes de subventions dans le secteur

• Au cours de l’annĂ©e Ă©coulĂ©e, seules 28 % des organisations caritatives ont dĂ©clarĂ© un taux de rĂ©ussite Ă©levĂ© (76 Ă  100 %) dans leurs demandes de subventions. PrĂšs de 40 % ont obtenu un taux de rĂ©ussite de 50 % ou moins, et 14 % n’ont pas du tout sollicitĂ© de subventions.
• Seuls 27 % des organismes caritatifs disposent d’un rĂ©dacteur de demandes de subventions dĂ©diĂ©, tandis que 64 % font appel Ă  divers membres du personnel qui partagent cette tĂąche avec leurs autres responsabilitĂ©s.
• Le temps reste un investissement majeur : 27 % des organisations consacrent en moyenne 16 Ă  30 heures Ă  chaque demande de subvention, tandis que 9 % y consacrent 30 heures ou plus.

(Hors réponses « Ne sais pas » et « N/A »)

La rĂ©daction de demandes de subventions n’est pas devenue plus facile pour la plupart des organismes de bienfaisance

MalgrĂ© l’adoption gĂ©nĂ©ralisĂ©e de portails de candidature pour rationaliser le processus, la plupart des organismes de bienfaisance affirment que la rĂ©daction de demandes de subventions n’est pas devenue plus facile et que, pour beaucoup, elle est mĂȘme devenue plus difficile. Et cela vaut pour tous les organismes, qu’ils soient grands ou petits, nouveaux ou Ă©tablis de longue date.

Lorsqu’on leur demande si la rĂ©daction de demandes de subventions est devenue plus difficile, les rĂ©ponses ne montrent aucune diffĂ©rence significative en fonction de la taille ou de l’anciennetĂ© de l’organisation. Par exemple, 43 % des grands organismes caritatifs affirment que c’est plus difficile aujourd’hui, contre 31 % des petits. Cette diffĂ©rence n’est pas statistiquement significative (XÂČ(8, N = 670) = 8,19, p = 0,415 (Ă  l’exclusion des rĂ©ponses « sans objet » et « ne sais pas »).

La mĂȘme tendance se retrouve dans les organisations, quel que soit leur nombre d’annĂ©es d’activitĂ© (XÂČ(8, N = 670) = 7,59, p = 0,475, hors rĂ©ponses « sans objet » et « ne sais pas »). En rĂ©sumĂ©, la plupart des organismes caritatifs, quels qu’ils soient et quelle que soit leur anciennetĂ©, rencontrent les mĂȘmes difficultĂ©s pour rĂ©diger des demandes de subvention.

Pourquoi la rédaction de demandes de subventions est plus facile pour certains mais plus difficile pour beaucoup

Certaines organisations caritatives dĂ©clarent que la rĂ©daction de demandes de subventions est plus facile car elles ont embauchĂ© des rĂ©dacteurs Ă  plein temps ou des consultants externes, ou parce qu’elles consacrent davantage de ressources internes Ă  ce processus. D’autres attribuent cette facilitĂ© Ă  l’amĂ©lioration de leurs systĂšmes internes, notamment Ă  une meilleure collecte et un meilleur suivi des donnĂ©es, qui facilitent la crĂ©ation de rapports et la narration. Quelques-unes ont soulignĂ© le passage Ă  des systĂšmes de candidature en ligne plus conviviaux et l’essor des outils d’IA tels que ChatGPT, qui ont accĂ©lĂ©rĂ© le processus de rĂ©daction.

Les relations sont Ă©galement importantes. Plusieurs organisations ont soulignĂ© le renforcement des liens avec les bailleurs de fonds, la rĂ©pĂ©tition des demandes et la tendance croissante Ă  une philanthropie basĂ©e sur la confiance, oĂč des partenariats de longue date conduisent Ă  des rapports plus simples et Ă  un financement plus flexible.

Pourtant, pour la plupart des organisations caritatives, la situation est tout autre.

Les organismes caritatifs ont fait part des dĂ©fis liĂ©s Ă  la concurrence croissante pour des fonds de plus en plus rares et Ă  la baisse des financements aprĂšs la COVID. D’autres ont indiquĂ© s’ĂȘtre vu refuser Ă  plusieurs reprises des subventions qu’ils avaient prĂ©cĂ©demment reçues, sans explication claire. « C’est comme essayer de gagner Ă  la loterie », a dĂ©clarĂ© l’un des rĂ©pondants. Et la charge administrative s’avĂšre insoutenable pour beaucoup :

Comme les bailleurs de fonds prĂ©fĂšrent soutenir des projets innovants plutĂŽt que les activitĂ©s de base, les organismes caritatifs sont souvent contraints d’inventer de nouvelles initiatives simplement pour rester Ă  flot. Les organisations ont exprimĂ© leur frustration face aux critĂšres d’Ă©ligibilitĂ© restrictifs, Ă  l’Ă©volution des prioritĂ©s des bailleurs de fonds et aux attentes croissantes en matiĂšre de donnĂ©es.

Comment améliorer la rédaction des demandes de subvention : avis des participants

• La nĂ©cessitĂ© de simplifier et d’uniformiser les demandes auprĂšs des organismes de financement.
• Une plus grande transparence dans les processus dĂ©cisionnels des bailleurs de fonds.
• L’importance d’un financement de base pluriannuel et durable pour rĂ©duire la fatigue administrative et amĂ©liorer l’impact.

Pour de nombreux organismes caritatifs, la rĂ©daction de demandes de subventions est une tĂąche essentielle, mais qui reprĂ©sente une charge de plus en plus lourde. Si certains parviennent Ă  s’en sortir grĂące Ă  de meilleurs outils, des Ă©quipes plus solides et des relations Ă©volutives avec les bailleurs de fonds, le secteur dans son ensemble est soumis Ă  de fortes pressions. Si les bailleurs de fonds et les dĂ©cideurs politiques veulent soutenir un impact communautaire significatif, ils doivent Ă©galement investir pour rendre le processus de financement plus accessible, plus transparent et plus durable.

Auteur

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Vous souhaitez recevoir nos articles de blog directement dans votre boßte mail ? Inscrivez-vous à notre newsletter en cliquant sur le lien suivant et suivez-nous sur les réseaux sociaux pour rester informé des derniÚres actualités concernant nos projets :

• Site web : /cicp-pcpob/
• Inscription Ă  la lettre d’information :
• LinkedIn :

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Des alliĂ©s pour l’accessibilitĂ© financiĂšre

Selon le rapport 2026 de Food Banks Canada sur la pauvretĂ©, une personne sur quatre au Canada est en situation d’insĂ©curitĂ© alimentaire, et bon nombre …

May 28, 2026

Quand la DEI n’est pas formalisĂ©e, mais reste nĂ©anmoins importante

Cette cohorte s’est dĂ©marquĂ©e dans les donnĂ©es du Projet Canada Perspectives des Organismes de Bienfaisance (PCPOB) : il s’agit des organismes de bienfaisance qui dĂ©clarent …

May 14, 2026

Pourquoi la maßtrise des données est plus importante que jamais pour le secteur caritatif canadien

La maĂźtrise des donnĂ©es est devenue une compĂ©tence indispensable dans l’ensemble du secteur caritatif, car les organisations doivent prendre des dĂ©cisions plus rapidement, dĂ©montrer plus …

The post Aperçu de la rédaction de demandes de subventions depuis les premiÚres lignes du secteur caritatif appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

For many charities, grant writing has become harder, more time consuming, and less sustainable, even as it remains critical to their survival. But a from the Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP) reveals more than just the usual barriers. The survey reveals where progress is happening and what’s working. Some organizations are improving their odds by investing in people, using smarter tools, and building stronger relationships with funders. Still, the majority are stretched thin, facing low success rates and high administrative demands.

A Snapshot of Grant Writing in the Sector

• Over the past year, only 28% of charities report a high success rate of 76-100% in their grant applications. Almost 40% had a success rate of 50% or less, and 14% didn’t apply for grants at all.
• Only 27% of charities have a dedicated grant writer, while 64% rely on various staff to share the work alongside their other responsibilities.
• Time remains a major investment: 27% of organizations spend on average 16-30 hours on each grant application, while 9% dedicate 30 hours or more.

(Excludes ‘Not sure’ and ‘N/A’ Responses)

Grant Writing Has Not Gotten Easier for Most Charities

Despite the widespread adoption of application portals to streamline the process, most charities say the grant writing process hasn’t eased and for many it has gotten harder. And that holds true across the board. Whether large or small, new or long-established, the challenges look the same across charities.

When asked whether grant writing has become more difficult, the responses show no meaningful difference by size or age of organization. For instance, 43% of large charities say it’s harder now, compared to 31% of small ones. This difference is not statistically significant (XÂČ(8, N = 670) = 8.19, p = .415 (Excludes N/A and Not sure Responses).

The same pattern holds across organizations in different years of operation (XÂČ(8, N = 670) = 7.59, p = .475, Excludes N/A and Not sure Responses). In short, most charities, regardless of who they are or how long they’ve been around, are feeling the same uphill challenge with grant writing.

Why Grant Writing is Easier for a Few but Harder for Many

Some charities report an ease in grant writing because they have hired full-time grant writers or external consultants, or they dedicate more internal resources to the process. Others credit improved internal systems, like better data collection and tracking, that make reporting and storytelling easier. A few highlighted the shift to more user-friendly online application systems and the rise of AI tools like ChatGPT, which have sped up the drafting process.

Relationships matter too. Several organizations pointed to stronger connections with funders, repeat applications, and the growing trend toward trust-based philanthropy where long-standing partnerships lead to simpler reporting and more flexible funding.

Yet for the many more charities, the story is starkly different.

Charities shared the challenges of growing competition for fewer dollars and post-COVID funding declines. Others noted being repeatedly denied grants they had previously received- without clear explanations why. “It’s like trying to win the lottery,” one respondent shared. And the administrative load is proving unsustainable for many:

Because funders prefer to support innovative projects, rather than core operations, charities are often forced to invent new initiatives just to stay afloat. Organizations voiced frustration over narrow eligibility criteria, shifting funder priorities, and rising expectations for data.

How to Improve Grant Writing: Insights from Panelists

• The need for simplified, standardized applications across funding bodies.
• Greater transparency in funder decision-making processes.
• The importance of multi-year, sustainable core funding to reduce administrative fatigue and improve impact.

Grant writing for many charities is an essential but increasingly heavy burden. While some are finding success through better tools, stronger teams, and evolving funder relationships, the sector as a whole is under strain. If funders and policymakers want to support meaningful community impact, they must also invest in making the funding process more accessible, transparent, and sustainable.

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 Insights on Grant Writing from the Front Lines of the Charitable Sector appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming industries around the world—and the charitable sector is no exception. Over the past two years, the Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP) has tracked how Canadian charities perceive and adopt AI (Surveys and ). In parallel, a 2024 global study by the surveyed over 6,000 people across ten countries, offering an international perspective on public sentiment.

Together, these studies suggest a cautiously optimistic view: charities and the public see real opportunities in AI, but concerns about ethics, equity, and human connection continue to shape adoption.

AI’s Growing Role in the Charitable Sector

Across 2023 and 2024, Canadian charities increasingly view AI as a tool to enhance program effectiveness, service delivery, and data analysis. Notably, use of AI for content creation saw the most dramatic shift—rising from 68% in 2023 to 75% in 2024. At the same time, skepticism is growing about AI’s impact on human decision-making.

This perspective echoes the CAF study’s findings, where 37% of global respondents felt AI’s benefits outweigh its risks, especially in areas like disaster response, operational efficiency, and outreach. Interestingly, optimism about AI was significantly stronger in low- and middle-income countries than in wealthier nations, where greater scrutiny remains the norm.

Challenges and Ethical Concerns: AI’s Unfinished Conversation

While AI adoption is increasingly seen as beneficial, concerns about its practical challenges regarding cost, complexity, and workforce persist. One of the most notable shifts in perception is a decrease in concerns about AI’s complexity, with fewer charities in 2024 agreeing that AI is too difficult to use (70% in 2023 vs. 64% in 2024). This suggests that charities are becoming more familiar with AI tools. In contrast, worries about AI-driven job displacement have remained steady.

Ethical and interpersonal concerns surrounding AI remain a critical issue, and in some areas, they have grown. The most notable change is the increase in concerns over data privacy and security, with combined agreement rising from 61% in 2023 to 66% in 2024. In contrast, fears that AI could reduce personal connections between charities and communities have slightly declined, from 69% to 65%. This suggests that charities may be gaining confidence in managing AI, without sacrificing community engagement.

Beyond practical and ethical concerns, some charities (Survey 2.10.39, October 2024) express worries about the digital divide, copyright infringement,  and the risk that  vulnerable communities may be left behind in an AI-driven world:

Others highlight broader risks tied to AI’s environmental and ethical footprint:

Public perception in the CAF study reflects similar worries, particularly regarding job losses and data security risks. One of the most striking findings is that 83% of people – especially donors – want transparency about how charities use AI. Notably, while those who donate more are 30% more likely to support AI use in charities, they are also particularly attentive to ethical AI use.

Three Suggested Actions for the Charitable Sector

Drawing from CICP and CAF findings, the following three recommendations can help guide responsible and inclusive AI adoption across the charitable landscape:

1. Prioritize Transparency and Donor Engagement
Donors and the public want to understand how AI is being used—whether for fundraising, service delivery, or internal decision-making. Proactive communication builds trust and strengthens relationships with both donors and beneficiaries.
2. Ensure AI Enhances—Not Replaces—Human Connection
Concerns about AI diminishing personal relationships are real. Charities should frame AI as a tool that enhances—not replaces—human interaction. For instance, automating administrative tasks can free up staff to focus more on direct community engagement.
3. Improve Access and Support for AI Implementation
Small and mid-sized charities face real barriers to AI adoption, from financial constraints to limited technical expertise. Many survey respondents called for more education, hands-on training, and partnerships to close this gap:

To address these disparities, funders and sector leaders should invest in accessible training, peer learning, and low-cost tools—ensuring that AI benefits are shared across the entire charitable ecosystem.

Conclusion

AI presents real opportunities for the charitable sector—from streamlining operations to expanding impact. But its integration must be thoughtful, equitable, and transparent. The cautious optimism shown by charities and the public signals a growing interest in the possibilities AI offers—alongside a clear call for ethical implementation that keeps human connection at the heart of nonprofit 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 Charities and AI: Cautious Optimism appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

Le secteur caritatif canadien est confrontĂ© Ă  une grave crise de recrutement et de fidĂ©lisation, qui menace sa capacitĂ© Ă  fournir des biens et des services essentiels. En 2020, a indiquĂ© que 38 % des organismes sans but lucratif s’attendaient Ă  avoir des difficultĂ©s Ă  recruter des employĂ©s qualifiĂ©s, tandis que 33 % s’attendaient Ă  avoir des difficultĂ©s Ă  conserver leur personnel. Une Ă©tude menĂ©e par en 2022 a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© que 65 % des organisations communautaires Ă©taient aux prises avec ces problĂšmes de ressources humaines, les organisations dirigĂ©es par des Autochtones et des Noirs Ă©tant confrontĂ©es Ă  des conditions particuliĂšrement difficiles.

Bien que la pandĂ©mie de COVID-19 ait intensifiĂ© ces dĂ©fis, la cause premiĂšre reste le sous-financement chronique du secteur. Des Ă©tudes de la et du soulignent que l’insĂ©curitĂ© du financement a conduit Ă  de faibles salaires, Ă  des emplois instables et Ă  un taux de rotation Ă©levĂ© pendant des dĂ©cennies. En consĂ©quence, l’Ă©puisement professionnel, la baisse du moral et la difficultĂ© d’attirer et de retenir les talents sont devenus monnaie courante.

Ce que les données du PCPOB révÚlent sur la rotation des employés

Depuis 2022, le Projet Canada Perspectives des Organismes de Bienfaisance (PCPOB) a sondĂ© les organismes de bienfaisance chaque semaine afin de suivre les dĂ©fis qui se posent Ă  l’Ă©chelle du secteur. En et en , nous avons examinĂ© spĂ©cifiquement la rĂ©tention du personnel et dĂ©couvert une augmentation significative du roulement des employĂ©s, principalement en raison d’une rĂ©munĂ©ration et d’avantages sociaux insuffisants et d’une augmentation de l’Ă©puisement professionnel.

Tendances en matiÚre de rotation des employés :

Nous avons classĂ© le chiffre d’affaires en trois groupes :

1. Pas de rotation
2. Faible rotation (1-20%)
3. Taux de rotation élevé (21-100%)

Nos donnĂ©es montrent une tendance Ă  l’aggravation au fil du temps. Les organisations dĂ©clarant un taux de rotation faible ou nul ont diminuĂ© entre 2023 et 2024, tandis que le taux de rotation Ă©levĂ© a bondi de 27 % Ă  39 %.

Chiffre d’affaires par taille d’organisation

Les grandes organisations ont toujours connu un taux de rotation plus Ă©levĂ©, mais d’ici 2024, mĂȘme les petites organisations caritatives seront touchĂ©es de maniĂšre significative. Par exemple :

• En 2023, les organismes dont les dĂ©penses annuelles sont supĂ©rieures Ă  61 529 $ ont signalĂ© des taux de roulement plus Ă©levĂ©s.
• En 2024, les organismes de bienfaisance dont les dĂ©penses sont infĂ©rieures Ă  61 529 $ sont Ă©galement confrontĂ©s Ă  des dĂ©parts plus importants.

Cette Ă©volution indique que l’instabilitĂ© du personnel s’accroĂźt dans l’ensemble du secteur, quelle que soit la taille des organismes de bienfaisance.

Chiffre d’affaires par annĂ©e d’activitĂ©

Alors que les organismes de bienfaisance plus récents (1 à 15 ans) affichaient un taux de roulement plus faible en 2023, cet avantage disparaissait en 2024. Les taux de roulement élevés touchent désormais aussi bien les jeunes organismes que les organismes bien établis.

Taux de rotation dans les zones urbaines et rurales

En 2023, les organismes de bienfaisance ruraux – – avaient des taux de roulement Ă©levĂ©s plus faibles (20 %) que les organismes urbains (28 %). En 2024, cet Ă©cart a Ă©galement disparu, les organismes de bienfaisance urbains et ruraux affichant tous deux un taux de roulement Ă©levĂ© de 38,5 %. Cela suggĂšre que les dĂ©fis en matiĂšre de ressources humaines sont maintenant rĂ©pandus, peu importe l’endroit.

Pourquoi les employés des organisations caritatives partent-ils ?

Pour comprendre les causes profondes du roulement du personnel, nous avons analysĂ© les donnĂ©es des organismes qui ont signalĂ© des pertes de personnel. La principale raison du roulement du personnel dans le secteur caritatif demeure la rĂ©munĂ©ration et les avantages sociaux, avec un pourcentage stupĂ©fiant de 45 % des organismes de bienfaisance citant ce facteur comme Ă©tant critique en 2023 et 47 % en 2024. En outre, l’Ă©puisement professionnel et le fait d’ĂȘtre submergĂ© par la charge de travail sont des prĂ©occupations croissantes, passant d’environ 28 % en 2023 Ă  environ 35 % en 2024. La combinaison de meilleures opportunitĂ©s ailleurs, de dĂ©parts Ă  la retraite et de personnel quittant complĂštement le secteur ne fait qu’exacerber ce dĂ©fi critique en matiĂšre de ressources humaines (voir le tableau ci-dessous).

Comment le secteur peut-il faire face Ă  la crise des ressources humaines ?

La collecte continue de donnĂ©es par le PCPOB continue de mettre en Ă©vidence l’urgence de rĂ©soudre la crise des ressources humaines dans le secteur caritatif canadien. Un financement prĂ©caire, de lourdes charges de travail et une rĂ©munĂ©ration insuffisante poussent les travailleurs qualifiĂ©s Ă  quitter le secteur, tandis que les organismes sont aux prises avec des demandes de services de plus en plus nombreuses. Pour permettre aux organismes de bienfaisance de rĂ©aliser leur mission et de servir efficacement les collectivitĂ©s, nous devons prĂ©coniser un financement plus sĂ»r et des stratĂ©gies sectorielles pour soutenir la main-d’Ɠuvre des organismes de bienfaisance.

Auteur

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Chiffres créés avec Chat GPT.

• Site web : /cicp-pcpob/
• Inscription Ă  la lettre d’information :
• LinkedIn :

Loading…

No category posts are available.

July 2, 2026

Des alliĂ©s pour l’accessibilitĂ© financiĂšre

Selon le rapport 2026 de Food Banks Canada sur la pauvretĂ©, une personne sur quatre au Canada est en situation d’insĂ©curitĂ© alimentaire, et bon nombre …

May 28, 2026

Quand la DEI n’est pas formalisĂ©e, mais reste nĂ©anmoins importante

Cette cohorte s’est dĂ©marquĂ©e dans les donnĂ©es du Projet Canada Perspectives des Organismes de Bienfaisance (PCPOB) : il s’agit des organismes de bienfaisance qui dĂ©clarent …

May 14, 2026

Pourquoi la maßtrise des données est plus importante que jamais pour le secteur caritatif canadien

La maĂźtrise des donnĂ©es est devenue une compĂ©tence indispensable dans l’ensemble du secteur caritatif, car les organisations doivent prendre des dĂ©cisions plus rapidement, dĂ©montrer plus …

The post Comprendre la crise RH à laquelle sont confrontées les organisations caritatives : Les données du PCPOB appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.

The charitable sector in Canada is facing a severe recruitment and retention crisis, threatening its ability to deliver essential goods and services. In 2020, reported that 38% of nonprofits anticipated challenges in recruiting skilled employees, while 33% expected difficulties in retaining staff. A study by the in 2022 revealed that 65% of nonprofits were struggling with these HR issues, with Indigenous- and Black-led organizations facing particularly dire conditions.

Although the COVID-19 pandemic intensified these challenges, the root cause remains the sector’s chronic underfunding. Studies from the and the highlight how insecure funding has led to low wages, unstable employment, and high turnover for decades. As a result, burnout, declining morale, and difficulty attracting and retaining talent have become widespread.

What CICP Data Reveals ĐÓ°ÉÔ­ŽŽ Employee Turnover

Since 2022, the Charity Insights Canada Project (CICP) has surveyed charities weekly to track sector-wide challenges. In and , we specifically examined staff retention, uncovering a significant increase in employee turnover—primarily driven by insufficient pay, benefits, and rising burnout.

Employee Turnover Trends:

We categorized turnover into three groups:

1. No turnover
2. Low turnover (1-20%)
3. High turnover (21-100%)

Our data shows a worsening trend over time. Organizations reporting no or low turnover decreased between 2023 and 2024, while high turnover jumped from 27% to 39%.

Turnover by Organization Size

Larger organizations historically experienced higher turnover, but by 2024, even smaller charities were significantly affected. For instance:

• In 2023, organizations with annual expenditures over $61,529 reported higher levels of turnover.
• By 2024, charities with expenditures under $61,529 also faced more significant staff departures.

This shift indicates that staffing instability is increasing across the sector, regardless of a charities size.

Turnover by Years of Operation

While newer charities (1-15 years old) reported lower turnover in 2023, that advantage disappeared by 2024. High turnover rates are now affecting both younger and well-established organizations alike.

Urban vs. Rural Turnover Rates

In 2023, rural charities—measured using the —had lower high-turnover rates (20%) compared to urban organizations (28%). By 2024, that gap vanished as well, with both urban and rural charities reporting 38.5% high turnover. This suggests that HR challenges are now widespread, regardless of location.

Why Are Charity Employees Leaving?

To understand the root causes of turnover, we analyzed data from organizations that reported staffing losses. The primary reason behind employee turnover in the charitable sector remains remuneration and benefits, with a staggering 45% of charities citing this as a critical factor in 2023 and 47% in 2024. Additionally, burnout and being overwhelmed by workload pressures are growing concerns, increasing from roughly 28% in 2023 to roughly 35% in 2024. The combination of better opportunities elsewhere, retirement, and staff leaving the sector altogether further exacerbates this critical HR challenge (see table below).

How Can the Sector Address the HR Crisis?

The ongoing data collection by the CICP continues to highlight the urgency of addressing the HR crisis in Canada’s charitable sector. Precarious funding, heavy workloads, and insufficient pay are driving skilled workers out of the sector, while organizations are left grappling with mounting service demands. To sustain charities to achieve their missions and serve communities effectively, we must advocate for more secure funding and sector-wide strategies to support the charitable workforce.

Author

McWhinney, Tara

• Postdoctoral Fellow
• Email Tara

Figures created with Chat GPT.

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 Understanding the HR Crisis Facing Charities: Insights from CICP Data appeared first on CICP-PCPOB.