1. AMBIKA SATKUNANATHAN NEELAN TIRUCHELVAM TRUST SRI LANKA Community Philanthropy in Times of Crisis: Support Needs when Caught Up in Conflict"

2. Context End of armed conflict between GoSL & LTTE in May 2009 but root causes have not been addressed. Impunity and lack of respect for the rule of law State driven resurgence of Sinhala Buddhist majoritarianism and attacks on religious minorities Militarization, particularly in the Northern part of the country. Restrictive environment (government regulations, military intervention, monitoring and surveillance) for human rights/peace- building/conflict- transformation work.

3. Context Continuing human rights violations and surveillance, harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers and even community workers. Few/limited effective local remedies Culture of denial- causes of conflict, last phase of the war, human rights violations, multi-ethnic nature of the country. SL categorised as a middle-income country (MIC)- hence many donors and international multilateral and non- governmental organisations phasing out or downsizing.

4. What can/should an indigenous Foundation do in a situation like Sri Lanka? We: Are present even when others leave  communities should not feel abandoned which will further weaken already frayed social networks. Are guided by communities in the provision of support, i.e. our constant engagement with communities has influenced and shaped our strategic plan. Suggestions of orgs we support have even helped us formulate user-friendly and less cumbersome proposal submission and project review processes. Do not wait for orgs to approach us for support but actively seek small organisations that are struggling to meet the needs of communities either due to lack of funds or capacity. Are flexible since the context changes rapidly and the community orgs we support have to change their strategies and interventions accordingly, sometimes even overnight.

5. What can an indigenous Foundation do in a situation like Sri Lanka? We: Create confidence amongst partners and grantees by supporting their institutions in ways that extend beyond solely funding projects. Focus on institutional strengthening. Act as facilitator to link local groups with larger orgs and donors. Are open to innovative strategies. We realise that often local organisation may have to initiate trust-building/community awareness raising/mobilization activities that may not appear directly related to the programme but nevertheless are required to create social conditions conducive to implement the programme. Are trying to move beyond using narrow indicators to measure the ‘success’ of initiatives we support. Take risks and invest in nascent organisations that implement innovative projects that larger donors may not be willing to support.

6. How can Community Philanthropy Support and Networking organisations help? Being part of support and networking orgs is a source of strength to indigenous foundations that are likely to feel isolated in hostile, volatile contexts. It enables us to build our institutional capacity through peer- learning, sharing and exchange. Partnerships with such networks has enabled us to provide non-monetary support to community groups  e.g. Foundations for Peace Network and NTT’s Women’s Fellowship Programme. Participating and being featured in network events and publications enables indigenous foundations to enhance their visibility and profile  this creates a security net for indigenous foundations that may be under threat since an international profile = more support in case of punitive action by the state.

7. How can Community Philanthropy Support and Networking organisations help? Membership in philanthropy networks: Can create confidence about the indigenous foundation amongst global grant-makers. Enable indigenous foundations to access global funds by partnering with network members  multi- country projects that focus on peer-learning.