06/07/2026
The inclusion of CSR via the SSE is hailed as a milestone, primarily because NGOs now get up to 3 years to utilise funds instead of rushing them within the same year.
But let’s look past the headlines. A company could already declare a project as "ongoing" to spread compliance over 3 years. The SSE opens a new avenue, but it doesn't increase the total quantum of available funds. It’s the same pool.
So far, ~20 non-profits have raised ₹50+ crores, with a few large ones capturing the lion’s share. If 100+ NGOs get listed, how will smaller grassroots teams stand out without massive resources? To get visibility on an exchange, you need marketing. Yet, if an NGO invests in communication, the backlash is immediate: "Why waste donor money?" It’s a frustrating catch-22.
Why treat CSR as a catch-all for all social impact, forcing managers to back projects misaligned with their goals?
Most CSR folks conduct rigorous due diligence and invest years with an NGO to achieve real impact. They shouldn't be forced into rigid compliance boxes.
What we truly need is a system that unlocks larger, flexible philanthropic capital by blending corporate and personal giving.
Imagine this layered approach:
Corporate CSR: Funds the rigid infrastructure (e.g., upgrading a school building).
Employees: Donate touchpoints, such as school supplies.
Founders/CEOs: Step up with personal philanthropic capital to fund what CSR legally cannot—like revolving funds for building repairs, teacher training, or monsoon preparedness.
What does the leader get? Publicity, acknowledgement, and a genuine understanding of the community. Let's get imaginative and tap into the larger philanthropic goodness in all of us.
To my network: Are you seeing an appetite for blending corporate CSR with flexible, personal giving? Let's discuss below.