Women’s funds are the backbone of financing for feminist movements. When AWID asked 1,174 feminist organisations in 128 countries where their money came from, 55% named women’s and feminist funds, ahead of international NGOs (36%), foundations (32%) and bilateral donors (19%) (Morena et al., 2025). RFLD’s 2026 data report, Funding Feminist Movements in Francophone West Africa, shows that these funds are now under pressure themselves. If they weaken, the organisations that depend on them have few alternatives.
78% affected by defunding
The Prospera network brings together women’s funds from around the world. In 2025, 78% of its members reported being affected by defunding. Confirmed losses reached US$65.3 million, and members expected an average budget cut of 30% by 2026 (Prospera, 2025).
A 30% cut for a women’s fund has a multiplied effect. Each fund supports dozens or hundreds of grantees. When its budget falls, it must choose between giving smaller grants to the same organisations or giving no grants to some of them. Either choice weakens movements that already work on very small budgets.
Bridge grants and reserves
Women’s funds have tried to protect their partners. Sixty-three per cent of Prospera members provide or plan bridge or emergency grants, and 29% are drawing on their reserves (Prospera, 2025). These responses show the value of funds that know their grantees and can act quickly. They are, by design, temporary. A fund that spends its reserves in 2025 and 2026 will have less room to respond to the next crisis.
Cuts to the funds of women’s funds
Some of the sharpest cuts have hit programmes that channelled money through women’s funds. In 2025, the Netherlands ended its support to the Leading from the South programme, which financed women’s funds in the Global South (Donor Tracker, 2025). Intermediary funders that support lesbian, bisexual, queer and other marginalised groups report some of the steepest reductions: 15 of 29 surveyed in July 2025 had cut their regranting budgets, by 25% on average since 2024 (Global Philanthropy Project, 2025).
Other funders remain committed. Canada’s Equality Fund has received CAD 300 million from the Canadian government for 2019 to 2035 and granted about CAD 61 million to 40 funds between 2020 and 2025, 91% of it as core funding (ImpactMapper, 2026). Its evaluation, published in September 2026, found that flexible funding reached partners that mainstream donors often miss, including unregistered groups and those working on criminalised issues.
Women’s funds in francophone West Africa
For francophone West Africa, a few funds play a decisive role. The African Women’s Development Fund, based in Accra, has granted US$80.2 million since 2001 to 1,614 organisations in 52 countries. The Urgent Action Fund Africa has made more than 5,200 grants across all 54 African countries. The Initiative Sankofa d’Afrique de l’Ouest granted US$2.5 million in 129 grants in 2023, with 55% going to francophone countries and 77% of grants renewed.
RFLD’s West African Feminist Fund and the sub-grants RFLD manages for partners add to these channels. Between June and September 2026, RFLD awarded 27 grants worth US$722,100, most of them in West Africa.
Why women’s funds work
The evidence reviewed in RFLD’s report explains why donors should protect women’s funds. They accept small organisations and offer core or flexible funding. Several work in French. They are close to the movements they fund and can identify which groups are active and safe to support, even in repressive contexts.
They also cost less to run than many alternatives. A 2022 study estimated that local intermediaries could deliver programmes 32% more cost-efficiently than international ones (Cabot Venton, 2022). Mama Cash’s average grant grew about 29-fold over 40 years as it moved to core, multi-year grants (Vaill et al., 2024), which shows how a fund can grow with its partners when it has stable resources.
What RFLD asks
RFLD’s report asks donors to channel resources through intermediaries rooted in the region, including RFLD’s West African Feminist Fund, AWDF, ISDAO and national women’s funds, with funding for their own operations. Without operating funds, an intermediary cannot run calls or support grantees, and regranting becomes a cost that small funds cannot carry.
It also asks women’s funds to publish their grant data regularly, including amounts, purposes and countries, so that a shared evidence base can show where money goes. RFLD does so itself, with a public list of its 2026 grantees and a commitment to publish its grants register every quarter.
A warning sign for 2027
Many women’s funds plan their grants a year or more in advance. The cuts announced in 2025 will therefore be felt most strongly by grantees in 2026 and 2027, as current grants end and are not renewed. Organisations that received their last grant in 2025 may not know yet that no renewal is coming. RFLD’s report asks donors to give women’s funds early notice of changes and to protect the operating budgets that allow them to support their partners through the transition.
Key figures
- 55%: feminist organisations that receive money from women’s and feminist funds, their main source.
- 78%: Prospera members affected by defunding in 2025.
- US$65.3 million: confirmed losses for Prospera members.
- 30%: the average budget cut Prospera members expected by 2026.
About the report
This article draws on RFLD’s data report Funding Feminist Movements in Francophone West Africa: 2026 Data (RFLD/DR/2026/03), published on 4 October 2026. Read the summary, download the English edition or the French edition. Sources cited in this article are listed in full in the data report.
