Should local organizations really be trusted with major funding? For many, the answer has long been uncertain and for groups like ZAPHA Plus from Zanzibar, that uncertainty has meant doors quietly closing despite years of impact on the ground. But something is beginning to shift. Behind the scenes, a different approach is challenging old assumptions, turning doubt into confidence and unlocking opportunities that once felt out of reach. What changed and what does it reveal about the real potential of local organizations?
By Amani A. Dawai
Here is the thing funders often ask themselves: should local organizations really be trusted?
It’s a fair question and one that continues to shape how funding decisions are made. For many donors, the hesitation comes down to experience, perceived risk, or concerns about whether local civil society organizations (CSOs) can meet compliance requirements and deliver at scale.
“We underwent an assessment, and the donor concluded that we did not meet the criteria to manage large-scale projects,” says Musa, Project Coordinator at ZAPHA Plus, Zanzibar.
In Tanzania ZAPHA Plus is not alone, the organization reflects a broader reality across Tanzania. Many CSOs find themselves locked out of funding opportunities, not because of lack of commitment or impact, but because they fall short of donor compliance standards. Over time, this creates a cycle where capacity gaps reinforce limited trust and limited trust restricts access to the very resources needed to grow.
But here is what this question often misses.
Organizations like ZAPHA+ are deeply embedded in the communities they serve. They understand local dynamics, needs, and solutions in ways that external actors often cannot. Their proximity is not a weakness; it is their greatest strength.
“ZAPHA+ has made a significant contribution to the fight against HIV since the early days. Even today, they remain a strong partner to the government. Whenever we need them, they are there to support,” Dr. Ahmed Khatib, Executive Director for Zanzibar AIDS Commission (ZAC).
The absence of these requirements should not undermine the value and commitment of organizations like ZAPHA+, which are deeply rooted in their communities and dedicated to addressing local issues.
And recognizing this gap between local relevance and institutional readiness, Save the Children, through its Global Civil Society Strengthening Programme funded by SIDA took a deliberate step to shift the narrative. The programme is anchored in a clear vision: building a strong civil society that both demands and supports the fulfillment of children’s rights, while holding governments accountable and empowering communities.
In practice, this meant partnering with seven Tanzanian organizations, THRDC, ZCRF, TCRF, WiLDAF, Rafiki SDO, Forum CC and ZAPHA Plus and investing in what matters most, their capacity to lead.
The approach was intentional. Rather than channeling resources through externally designed projects, the programme supported organizations to develop and implement their own initiatives, while strengthening the systems, policies, and structures required to meet donor standards.
“This project is unique because it invests in initiatives that we, as organizations, have designed ourselves, rather than projects created by donors for us to implement,” explains Sophia Leghela, Project Coordinator at ZCRF.
The results speak to what becomes possible when trust is built alongside capacity.
“After receiving capacity strengthening support, we were able to identify and address our organizational gaps, including developing key policies. When other donors later conducted assessments, they confirmed that we now meet the required standards and can be trusted with larger projects. In fact, we have already secured funding of TZS 59 millions (More than 20,000 USD) from UNAIDS,” Musa shares.
What this really shows is that the issue was never about whether local organizations can deliver. It was about whether they are given the opportunity and support to meet the systems that funding requires.
For Save the Children, localization is not a slogan. It is a shift in power, resources, and decision-making to those closest to the issues, local organizations, communities, and children themselves. It is about moving from implementation to leadership, where local actors define priorities, shape solutions, and access funding more directly.
Save the Children’s role, then, becomes complementary, providing technical expertise, global influence, and targeted capacity strengthening, while ensuring that accountability remains rooted in communities, not just donor frameworks.
The result is not only stronger organizations, but more relevant, sustainable, and community-owned impact.
And perhaps, over time, a different answer to that first question.
