Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: What is the geographical scope of the Open Society Foundations' work and impact?
Executive Summary
The Open Society Foundations (OSF) operates as a global grantmaker with an asserted presence in over 120 countries, deploying funding and programs across regions from the United States to Africa, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East and North Africa, and the Asia-Pacific [1] [2] [3]. Recent reporting and OSF communications show a strategic shift toward local priorities and systemic change while maintaining broad geographic reach, with renewed emphasis on the Global South and specific national presences in Europe [4] [5].
1. How Big Is “Global”? A Quantified Reach That Still Matters
OSF publicly states a footprint in more than 120 countries, giving thousands of grants annually and deploying multi-regional programs that cover civil society, human rights, media, and justice reforms; this numeric claim is repeated across organizational channels and profiles [1] [2]. The organization’s historic role as one of the largest funders of human rights and civic groups is reinforced by cumulative grant totals—over $11 billion since 1993—and year-by-year disbursements like $125.5 million to Africa in 2023, demonstrating tangible investment levels in particular regions [6] [5]. These figures support the conclusion that OSF’s geographic scope is broad and materially consequential.
2. Regions Named, Strategies Differ: Not One-Size-Fits-All
OSF’s geographic presence is not just rhetorical; its public materials list regional portfolios—Africa, Asia Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, and the United States—indicating tailored thematic work tied to regional politics and civil society needs [3]. Within Europe and Central Asia, OSF maintains national foundations and offices in places such as Berlin, Brussels, London, and national entities in the Western Balkans, Ukraine, and Moldova, signaling a country-level operational posture alongside transregional programs [4]. This distribution shows an approach that combines broad continental coverage with focused national interventions.
3. Strategic Shift: From Global Network to Local Priorities
Recent organizational messaging and journalistic reporting indicate a strategic rethinking: OSF is pivoting toward local priorities and systemic change, emphasizing support for grassroots actors and the Global South while recalibrating operations in response to political pushback, funding constraints, or changing philanthropic norms [4] [7]. Journalists covering OSF note leadership and programmatic debates about the limits of philanthropic influence and the need to empower local institutions rather than rely solely on global grantmaking, which suggests an evolving geographic posture shaped by strategic and political realities [7].
4. Spotlight on Africa and the Global South: Dollars and Intent
Reporting from 2025 highlights explicit increases in support to African countries and the Global South, with OSF allocating $125.5 million through its Africa programs in 2023, and public narratives stressing a renewed focus on inequality and locally-led solutions [5]. This underscores a rebalancing of geographic emphasis from its historically strong investments in Europe and post-communist transitions toward regions where civic infrastructure and rights-protection face acute challenges. The shift manifests in both rhetorical commitments and documented funding flows.
5. Europe and Central Asia: Dense Presence, Political Sensitivities
OSF continues to be active in Europe and Central Asia, addressing economic equity, independent media, migration, and rule-of-law concerns; it maintains offices and national foundations across key European capitals and several post-Soviet states [4] [8]. That regional depth comes with political exposure—OSF’s presence in specific countries is frequently cited in debates about foreign influence and democracy support—so its geographic footprint in the region is both operationally dense and politically contested, shaping how OSF frames its local work.
6. Organizational Scale vs. Local Ownership: Tension in Execution
OSF’s scale—thousands of grants, billions in cumulative giving—creates capacity to operate across continents, but leaders and observers describe a tension between large-scale philanthropy and the goal of local ownership, driving the current strategy to devolve decision-making and prioritize locally determined agendas [4] [7]. This shift aims to reconcile global reach with credible local partnerships, but also implies changing geographic patterns of influence: durable presence where local partners are strong, and strategic withdrawals or reconfigurations where political resistance or limited impact is evident.
7. What the Different Sources Emphasize and Why It Matters
Organizational communications [1] [2] emphasize breadth and continuity, asserting presence in 120+ countries and thousands of grants; strategic memos [4] stress adaptation and local prioritization; independent journalism [5] [7] highlights both increased Global South investment and the limits of philanthropic power. These emphases reflect different agendas: institutional reporting underscores legitimacy and scale, strategic pieces explain change management, and journalistic accounts scrutinize effectiveness and political constraints. Together they provide a coherent picture: OSF’s geographic scope is large, but actively being reshaped by strategy and context.