Standing still has a cost, who’s paying for it?

There’s a lot of talk right now about resilience in the community sector. What we talk about far less is who is paying for it.

RNZ has been reporting what many of us already know: charities closing, restructuring, and pulling back services at the same time demand is rising and costs are climbing. These stories tend to focus on charities closing due to being unable to find other means to fund these essential services. What they don’t always show is where the pressure actually lands day‑to‑day. In reality, it lands on staff and volunteers – driving further, covering more ground, and absorbing costs personally just to keep services going.

The fuel crisis is hitting households hard, we all know this, but community services are uniquely exposed. In many regions, public transport isn’t reliable or even available. Our work depends on being there: outreach, home visits, rural delivery, mobile services. Travel isn’t a luxury – it’s a much needed service.

So what happens when the system stays the same, but delivery costs don’t?

Funders and philanthropic grants are often locked into short funding cycles – often 12 months. Budgets are forecast well in advance, leaving very little room to move when unexpected costs hit. And when those costs show up – like a fuel crisis – it hurts fast. Service delivery becomes harder, staff absorb pressure, boards watch risk creep in quietly, and expectations stay fixed while in reality costs to keep the doors open is unsustainable.

In 2024, we provided a practical solution: a salary packaging scheme for the community and voluntary sector. Not a pilot. Not a shiny innovation. A mechanism that already exists and has existed for decades – in Australia. The aim was simple: put real money back into not for profit workers’ pockets without expecting charities to magically lift salaries they can’t afford.

In Australia, salary packaging for not‑for‑profits is standard practice, clearly set out by the Australian Taxation Office and widely used across the sector to help with everyday living and transport costs (ATO guidance) – it’s also an incentive mechanism to keep talented staff within our sector.

So it’s worth asking the uncomfortable question: who else was offering something that practical? Something that would have reduced out‑of‑pocket pressure immediately?

Meanwhile, the financial crisis and now fuel costs is deepening community crisis. Travel has increased. Pay hasn’t kept pace. Staff and volunteers are still covering the gap.

At our recent Board Talk: Funding Fatigue, boards were clear about what’s happening. More reporting. More pressure. Less flexibility. Strategy parked while survival takes over. If funders – government and philanthropic want sustainability, they need to respond as if this is a crisis, not an inconvenience. That means funding settings that move when costs move, permission to renegotiate when conditions change, and backing mechanisms that improve workers’ real lives — not just organisational balance sheets.

We also need to be honest about accountability, organisations are understandably reluctant to tell funders they’re struggling – nobody wants to be seen as not efficient or that there are any problems in the moment or on the horizon. However, when funders fund organisations and then watch them shut their doors six months later, responsibility might also be a reality check – as responsibility runs both ways.

Standing still has a cost. Right now, our people are paying the cost — and our communities rely on them.