Collaborative funds are a trend and point to promising paths both in philanthropic practice itself and in solving structural challenges.
I recently read some material from Bridgespan that really thought-provoking. Released in April 2026, "Collaboratives as a Philanthropic Asset Class" discusses a trend that has been gaining momentum in international philanthropy: collaborative funds. In simple terms, these are initiatives that pool resources from different donors around a common strategy, with technical expertise, governance, and monitoring.
The comparison made in the article is apt. In the world of investing, few people choose each asset on their own. Many entrust part of their resources to funds and specialists. In philanthropy, the logic can be similar.
When a donor acts alone, their intention may be very generous, but their ability to understand, monitor, and scale the results tends to be limited. When multiple donors unite around a strategy, the financial resource comes with something important: shared intelligence.
The document highlights that collaborative funds are not a magic solution, nor are they a cure-all, but they help to name something that, in the Bem Maior Movement, we have been practicing in recent years. When faced with complex problems, donating together can be more effective than donating alone.
This is an idea that requires recognizing that good resources need good questions. Impact doesn't just come from the desire to help, but from the ability to understand territories, organizations, leadership, and contexts.
Those who donate want to know where the resources are going, who will be supported, and what difference it can make. That's natural. But there's a philanthropic maturity that begins when the donor realizes that control and impact don't always go hand in hand.
To create a greater impact, sometimes it's necessary to rely on collective processes. To listen to other perspectives, share decisions, and perhaps even support organizations that weren't on each investor's individual radar, but that make a huge difference in the territories where they operate.
This does not diminish the responsibility of each donor. Donating through a collaborative fund does not mean withdrawing from the decision, but rather participating in a more qualified process where different experiences help to build better choices.
Bridgespan highlights three benefits of collaborative funds: efficiency, because the donor does not need to create an entire analysis and monitoring structure on their own; effectiveness, because the decision is based on accumulated knowledge, field analysis, and governance; and engagement, because collaboration creates learning opportunities among peers .
And this is especially true when we consider the Brazilian reality. We will not address inequalities, food insecurity, low social mobility, or vulnerable territories with isolated responses. No donor, however committed, can solve everything alone.
Collaboration is a path that MBM has been building with many partners and, especially, donors who have agreed to experience a different way of doing philanthropy. People who understand that the most important role is not played by those who donate, but by the transformation that becomes possible when many work together.
Collaboration is not a philanthropic fad. It's a more honest response to the complexities of the world we live in today.
">
