•  
•  

Launched at the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy in 2009, The Foundation Review is the first peer-reviewed journal about and for philanthropy. We publish on leading-edge ideas, results, and knowledge about the philanthropic sector to improve grantmaking and support greater impact. Our readership is made up of foundation leaders and staff, philanthropic practitioners and consultants, and academic researchers.

Abstracts of up to 250 words are invited for Volume 18, Issue 3 of The Foundation Review on the themed issue of Philanthropy and the Climate Crisis. Submit abstracts to by December 2, 2025. If a full paper is invited, it will be due February 13, 2026, for consideration for publication in Fall 2026.

Overview

In early 2025, global climate leaders from philanthropy, government, climate funds, field-building, nonprofit, and multilateral organizations, issued a collective call-to-action. It urged those who commission, generate, and use evidence to take five actions to enhance our strategic relevance and impact in addressing the global climate crisis:

1. Shift focus from projects to systems transformation
2. Become champions of evidence-informed decision making
3. Deploy evaluative practice early and often
4. Embrace multiple ways of knowing
5. Learn collectively to scale impact

Core to this call-to-action was the need to learn better together to meet the urgency and scale of this moment. While many climate funders are already active collaborators in their grantmaking and investments, regular sharing of learning or development of a knowledge base remains a collective need in the field.

This open-access issue of The Foundation Review will lift up evidence and lessons about what is being tried around these actions and others, what is working, and what is still challenging philanthropies addressing climate change.

Topics that articles might address in this issue include:

• How is evidence being used to drive actions and investments within the climate movement and contributing meaningfully to advancing effective and equitable climate action?
• How are we generating and using systems-level insights to inform climate actions and investments?
• How is learning and evaluation being integrated throughout the lifecycle of strategies, programs, and policies–from early design, strategy and planning, to adaptive implementation–to drive sound decision making, identify emergent risks and opportunities, and narrow in on the most impactful strategic path forward?
• How are we broadening our definition of evidence and working with many forms of data and ways of knowing, including, for example, observational data, digital data, Indigenous methods of data gathering, and multimedia data such as stories, images, and videos?
• In places where our work overlaps or in areas where we are working toward shared outcomes, how are we building evidence on common questions, pooling our learning and evaluative resources, and working together to generate and use insights?

Abstracts are solicited in four categories (authors do not need to specify a category for their submission):

• Results: Papers in this category generally report on findings from evaluations of foundation-funded work. Papers should include a description of the theory of change (logic model, program theory), a description of the grantmaking strategy, the evaluation methodology, the results, and a narrative discussion. The discussion should focus on what has been learned both about the content (e.g., what has been learned about communications strategies) and about grantmaking and other foundation roles (convening, etc.). We especially seek papers that describe “hard lessons” – efforts that were not successful in achieving the intended outcomes in the timeframe envisioned.
• Tools: Papers in this category should describe tools useful for foundation staff or boards. By “tool” we mean a systematic, replicable methodology intended for a specific purpose. For example, a protocol to assess community or organizational readiness or standardized facilitation methods would be considered tools. The actual tool should be included in the article whenever practical. The paper should describe the rationale for the tool, how it was developed, and available evidence of its usefulness.
• Sector: Papers in this category address issues confronted by the philanthropic sector as a whole, such as diversity, accountability, etc.
• Reflective Practice: Papers in this category rely on the knowledge and experience of the authors, rather than on formal evaluation methods or designs. In these cases, it is because of their perspective about broader issues, rather than specific initiatives, that the article is valuable.

Papers should emphasize the practical applications of the findings. Reviewers will be evaluation professionals, foundation program and evaluation staff and board members, and other experts in the content area. Reviews of the full paper will be double blind. Authors can view full manuscript specifications and standards before submitting an abstract at https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/tfr/for_authors.html.

Book Reviews: The Foundation Review publishes reviews of relevant books. Please contact the editor to discuss submitting a review. Reviewers must be free of conflicts of interest.