Work in non-governmental organizations is demanding and often performed in conditions of overload and emotional engagement. However, little attention has been paid so far to the impact of the public grant system on the mental well-being of NGO teams. These recommendations regarding the public grant system in Poland are based on qualitative and exploratory research conducted as part of Burnout Aid, an international initiative by three organizations: Polish Culture Shock Foundation, Croatian Common Zone, and Slovenian City of Women. Our research consisted of desk research and 60 in-depth interviews with employees, volunteers, an NGO management team, and experts in the field of employment law, psychology, and anti-burnout policies. Our goal was to capture the nature of professional burnout in the third sector and prepare practical recommendations that consider not only the nature of work in NGOs, but also cultural and systemic factors.
The recommendations were prepared by Paulina Jędrzejewska and Piotr Grabowski (Culture Shock Foundation), Adela Gąsiorowska (NGO Committee of the Workers' Initiative), and Łukasz Broniszewski and Adrian Stelmaszyk (Stabilo Foundation). Our project played a key role in the debate about what changes need to be made to the public grant system to ensure that organizations can operate safely and sustainably.
Even though we compiled the recommendations in 2020, they remain relevant in 2025.
1. Short-term grants and “grant dependency”
The most common issue raised is the dominance of short-term, usually annual grants. In practice, such a grant is enough for 8 to 9 months of work. This cycle leads to so-called “grant dependency” – a constant search for new funds, tension in the teams, stress cause by the potential end of funding, and the pressure of having to close out the grant quickly. Employees are often hired under junk or fixed-term contracts ("junk contracts" are civil law contracts, such as a mandate contract or a specific work contract, that do not provide employees with basic rights and protection under the Polish Labour Code), which undermines their sense of security and is conducive to mental crises.
Recommendation
More multi-annual grants should be made available. Long-term actions are crucial to ensure greater financial stability, enable strategic development, and increase employment security in the sector, which will have a direct impact on the teams' well-being.
2. Employment contracts and stability
Another problem is the dominance of civil law and fixed-term contracts. Employment insecurity and a lack of employee rights make life planning difficult and increase the risk of burnout. Organizations can hire under employment contracts even for short-term projects. However, grantors do not always promote this form of employment, and even less often require it. This is not conducive to mental well-being (failure to respect employee rights, a lack of possibility to go on paid leave, employment insecurity) and pursuing future life goals, such as starting a family.
Recommendation
Grantors should reward organizations that offer permanent employment contracts and take this aspect into account already in the application review stage. If part of the grant funds is intended for salaries, the grant should be awarded under the condition that the organization offers permanent employment contracts. Such a form of employment can be used even when carrying out short-term project – this significantly improves employment conditions and life stability for activists.
3. Non-public and inconsistent procedures
Municipal and national grant competitions often lack transparent and detailed rules for awarding grants. The regulations do not specify how the applications are evaluated, how the expert committee works, or what the scoring criteria are. Evaluation sheets, if made available, usually do not provide organizations with relevant feedback. Often, the only information they receive is how many points their application was given.
The results of competitions, especially those run by central administration, are announced with delays, forcing organizations to modify their schedules and reduce project activities.
Issues such as excessive bureaucracy, not allowing rectification of formal deficiencies, or non-recognition of powers of attorney, complicate the process further. In many cases, there is also no appeal procedure and the regulations do not specify whether the decision can be challenged in an administrative court.
Another impediment is the lack of standardized competition rules and application forms used by different grantors operating at the same level (e.g. central, local, or European).
Recommendation
The procedures and application forms should be standardized across all levels of administration. The application process should be simplified to increase transparency, ensure equal access, and improve efficiency of grant competitions. Realistic deadlines for announcing the results, the right to appeal, and the obligation to call for rectification of formal deficiencies are essential. Grantors should also reserve funds to finance porjects selected following successful appeal procedures.
4. Budgetary flexibility
Grantors often award grants in amounts significantly lower than what organizations apply for. Sometimes applicants receive even less than 50% of the requested sum, which forces organizations to limit the scope of their activities, reduce salaries, and carry out projects at the expense of their employees' well-being.
In addition, management costs (10-25% of the budget) include a wide range of expenses, from salaries for coordination and accounting to space rental and technical costs, making it problematic to cover them fully. As a result, key employees often work for below-market rates or are not paid at all, especially in the project preparation and reporting stages, when costs are not eligible. This results in team overload, increasing the risk of burnout.
Another challenge is the difficulty in obtaining funds for the required own contribution.
Recommendation
Grantors should avoid awarding grants that cover less than 80% of the requested amount. If funding is reduced, they should be obliged to justify their decision and grantees should have the opportunity to consult and renegotiate the scope of the project.
To increase budgetary flexibility:
-
administrative cost limits should be removed,
-
coordination should be recognized as a substantive cost,
-
lump-sum grant settlements should be based on results and not a detailed budget.
The budget for the project should also include preparatory and final activities (e.g. updating the application, reporting), carried out beyond the formal schedule.
We also recommend launching programs to support the funding of own contributions or ceasing to require own contributions altogether. Grantors should enable pooling funds from different sources and provide additional funds for the organization's institutional development (e.g. training sessions, supervision, PR activities).
5. Implementation of projects in crisis
The experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that a lack of flexibility in extending project timelines and covering additional costs is a real threat to teams. Back then, organizations had to cover the costs of remuneration themselves and, consequently, reduce salaries, or force employees to work without pay and sometimes even lay them off. This carried the risk of financial destabilization or losing the team.
Grantors award grants for a fixed period. Extensions are rarely possible, which makes it difficult to implement projects and educes the quality of activities when an external or internal crisis appears.
The grant regulations do not take into account what the work of activists is like. Activists are often exposed to burnout and mental crises while lacking stable employment conditions. It is not possible to temporarily slow down or suspend activities. Therefore, teams are forced to keep prioritizing work over health.
Recommendation
A possibility to extend project timelines and increase grants in unforeseen circumstances and justified cases, such as due to illness, a mental crisis within the team, or sudden organizational difficulties. In multi-annual projects, it is worth giving organizations the freedom to modify the schedule.
In emergencies, such as a pandemic, it is necessary not only to allow the team to extend the project timeline, but also to award higher grants to cover additional costs, especially the team's salaries.
6. Making supervision a standard
A lack of supervisory support for activists in difficult working conditions is a significant problem. NGO activists often work in difficult and dangerous conditions while helping individuals at risk of exclusion. Such work is a real burden on mental health and requires systemic supervisory support, for the benefit of employees, the entire organization, and the beneficiaries of activities.
Recommendation
Mandatory supervision and additional funding for mental health support need to be introduced. Grant competition regulations should require supervision for teams working with individuals from disadvantaged groups, as well as for those involved in social economy projects or in support and training roles. This requires a separate, additional pool of funds, e.g. within the institutional part of the grant.
Summary
Our research (see “Burnout in the third sector”) and experts' recommendations have shown that burnout is a systemic phenomenon. It stems not only from individual, excessive involvement of employees, but also from restrictions and pressure resulting from the way the public grant system functions as a whole. Short-term grants, a lack of employment stability, unclear application procedures, and limited institutional budgets often make NGO employees lose control over their work and sense of financial security.
These conditions lead to chronic stress and burnout, which affect individuals working in emotionally demanding helping professions, facing difficult and sometimes even dangerous conditions. The pressure to achieve the project's goals within a fixed amount of time and a rigid financial framework often results in ignoring the nature of teams' lives, especially when activists are experiencing health or mental crises. A lack of flexibility, wage restrictions, and insufficient psychological support, such as the absence of mandatory supervision, only aggravate the problem.
The changes we suggest, including extending the project timeline in crises, greater budgetary flexibility, removing rigid limits on management costs, as well as making supervision a standard practice and providing actual financial support for the institutional development, may gradually improve working conditions in the third sector. Consequently, these changes may not only reduce the level and risk of professional burnout but also help build a healthier, more stable, and effective non-governmental sector.
Healthy organizations mean better quality and greater effectiveness of support aimed at individuals and communities. Investing in working conditions and employees' well-being is essential for the long-term development and positive impact NGOs have on the world.
