When Is a Big Bet a Good Bet? Getting Large-Scale Philanthropy Right
About the session
Something significant is happening in philanthropy.
New wealth is entering the sector. Established foundations are experimenting with larger, longer, and more flexible commitments. And as official development assistance contracts and multilateral systems come under pressure, private philanthropy is increasingly being asked to do more.
The question is not simply whether philanthropy will rise to the moment. It is whether it will rise to it well.
Big bets can be genuinely catalytic. They can take risks other institutions cannot, back ideas early, provide organizations with the stability to think beyond annual grant cycles, and help proven approaches reach a scale that would otherwise be impossible.
But size alone does not make a bet transformative.
Large commitments can also concentrate decision-making among a small number of funders, distort organizational priorities, crowd out smaller and locally rooted actors, or create dependencies that become painfully apparent when the funding ends.
So what separates a good big bet from a merely big one?
The architecture matters. Who receives large-scale capital and on what terms? What evidence should exist before a funder commits at scale? How do funders stay close enough to ground reality to know whether their assumptions are holding? What does a healthy relationship look like when one organization controls millions of dollars that another organization may depend upon?
And what happens at the end?
Some of philanthropy’s most consequential investments have helped demonstrate approaches that governments or other institutions can eventually finance at scale. But that handoff is rarely automatic. Philanthropic capital can complement public systems, but it cannot substitute indefinitely for the accountability, legitimacy, and long-term financing those systems provide.
There is also a distribution question. Organizations doing important work in difficult contexts are not necessarily the organizations best equipped to navigate extensive due diligence, grant administration, reporting requirements, and the organizational expectations that accompany very large commitments. If more philanthropic capital simply flows through the same channels, more money does not necessarily mean more power or resources reaching locally led organizations.
This session asks what philanthropy needs to get right as the stakes, and potentially the bets, get bigger.
Not only how much, but how.
Discussion Group Leaders
Liz Diebold is an Independent Philanthropic Advisor, mobilizing philanthropic, public, and private capital for systems-level impact centered on human dignity.
Maria Franco is Managing Director at Redwoods Collective, accelerating climate philanthropy through climate intelligence and strategies that help funders move capital with greater speed and impact.
Klau Pakos is CEO & Co-Founder at Lafiya, advancing locally led solutions that improve health and well-being in underserved communities.
Jennifer Shin is Director at Panorama Strategy, advancing philanthropic strategies and catalytic funding partnerships that center local leadership in global health and development.
Srividya Prakash is Interim CEO and Board Member at Antara International, advancing global health and gender equality through philanthropy, strategy, and organizational leadership.
What to expect
A candid conversation moving between the perspectives of funders, organizations receiving large commitments, and people who advise on how philanthropic capital is deployed.
Participants will examine what makes big bets succeed or fail, how funders can distinguish scale from impact, what receiving a transformative commitment actually looks like from the other side of the relationship, and what the next generation of philanthropic capital can learn from what has already been tried.
The aim is not to make the case for or against big bets. It is to get more precise about the conditions under which they genuinely enable change.
Who this is for
This session is for philanthropists, foundation leaders, wealth advisors, philanthropic intermediaries, development strategists, grantee organizations, evidence and evaluation practitioners, and anyone thinking seriously about how private capital can do more good and less harm as the development finance landscape changes.
What you will get out of it
A framework for distinguishing big bets that catalyze change from those that distort or crowd out
Perspectives from organizations on what receiving a transformative philanthropic commitment actually requires
A clearer understanding of the evidence, relationships, accountability, and exit strategies that can make large investments more effective
Lessons for new philanthropists entering the sector from what existing funders and grantees have already learned
Practical questions funders, advisors, and intermediaries can use when designing their next big bet