The Trillion-Dollar Gap: Why India’s Philanthropy Boom Needs More Than Just Money 

The Trillion-Dollar Gap: Why India’s Philanthropy Boom Needs More Than Just Money 

The numbers are staggering. India’s social sector is awash in funding—at least by historical standards. Between 2020 and 2025, total funding grew at a 13% compound annual rate, reaching roughly ₹27 lakh crore ($310 billion). By 2030, that figure is projected to hit ₹50 lakh crore ($570 billion). On paper, it looks like a success story. 

But here’s what those numbers don’t tell you: the gap between what India has and what India needs is actually getting worse. 

The India Philanthropy Report 2026, released this month by Bain & Company in collaboration with Dasra, presents a paradox that should worry anyone who cares about the country’s social development. Despite unprecedented growth in funding—driven almost entirely by government spending—the funding deficit based on NITI Aayog norms stood at nearly ₹16 lakh crore ($180 billion) in FY25. By 2030, that gap could widen to ₹18 lakh crore ($210 billion). 

Think about what that means. The gap alone is larger than the entire GDP of countries like Portugal or New Zealand. And it’s growing. 

The 95% Reality Check 

Let’s start with the obvious: the government is doing the heavy lifting. Public spending accounts for roughly 95% of all social sector funding in India. Healthcare and education budgets continue to rise in line with national policy priorities, and that’s not going to change. Nor should it. The state has both the mandate and the machinery to deliver services at scale. 

But here’s the uncomfortable truth that the report lays bare: government spending alone won’t close the gap. Not even close. 

Private philanthropy in India is projected to reach ₹1.43 lakh crore ($16 billion) in FY25, with growth expectations of 9% to 11% annually through 2030. That’s respectable by global standards. But the report’s authors run the numbers and find that sustained growth above 25% would be required just to prevent the funding deficit from widening further. Twenty-five percent. Year after year. 

That’s not going to happen by accident. It’s going to require something far more fundamental than wealthy people writing bigger checks. 

The Family Factor That Everyone Misses 

Here’s where the report gets interesting. When we talk about Indian philanthropy, we’re really talking about families. Not corporations, not foundations, not institutional investors—families. 

Family-owned or family-run businesses contribute about 42% of total private giving in India, through a combination of personal philanthropy and CSR. But what’s changing is how these families approach giving. 

The report highlights three shifts that are quietly reshaping Indian philanthropy: 

First, giving priorities are expanding beyond traditional causes. Gender equity, diversity and inclusion, climate action, livelihood enhancement, arts and culture, and animal welfare are all gaining ground. This isn’t just about writing checks to the same old trusts and temples. Families are thinking strategically about where their money can make a difference. 

Second, women are now leading philanthropic efforts in more than 60% of families. That’s not a cosmetic change. Anyone who has worked in the social sector knows that gender dynamics shape giving patterns. Women tend to ask different questions, prioritize different outcomes, and stick with causes longer. The fact that women are increasingly making these decisions matters. 

Third, younger generations are taking the lead. And they’re not content to simply continue what their parents started. They want to do things differently—more professionally, more measurably, more impactfully. 

The Professionalization Paradox 

This brings us to what might be the most important trend in the report: philanthropy in India is becoming professionalized. 

That sounds like jargon, but it means something real. It means families are setting up dedicated teams. It means they’re hiring people with sector expertise. It means they’re thinking about governance, about multi-year commitments, about metrics that go beyond “we gave money to a good cause.” 

The Dasra team, which has been at this for over two decades, knows this shift better than anyone. When they started in 1999, “strategic philanthropy” was a phrase that drew blank stares. Today, it’s becoming the norm among serious givers. 

But here’s the paradox the report uncovers: professionalization at the family level is necessary but not sufficient. What India needs is professionalization at the ecosystem level. 

Right now, philanthropic capital is concentrated among a small number of large family businesses and distributed unevenly across states. High-poverty regions remain underfunded because that’s not where the wealthy families live. Good organizations struggle to get noticed. Money flows to connections rather than impact. 

This is what the report calls the “infrastructure gap”—and it’s the key to understanding why India’s philanthropic boom isn’t translating into the progress it should. 

Three Forces That Could Change Everything 

The report identifies three forces that could dramatically expand philanthropic capital over the next decade. But here’s the catch: each requires deliberate investment in infrastructure to realize its potential. 

First, institutionalized wealth. Family offices are exploding in India. Wealth that was once managed informally is now being structured professionally. That creates an opening. If you can make the case that effective philanthropy belongs alongside investment management and succession planning in the family office mandate, you can unlock significant capital. But that requires what the report calls “a connective layer”—organizations and platforms that can help family offices do philanthropy well without having to build everything from scratch. 

Second, the diaspora. India’s overseas population now stands at about 34 million, with remittances growing rapidly. But here’s what’s changing: the diaspora wants more than just sending money home. They want to engage. They want to bring their expertise, their networks, their global perspective. The challenge is that most Indian organizations aren’t set up to receive that kind of engagement. They’re set up to receive checks. Building the infrastructure for deeper diaspora engagement could transform not just how much money flows, but how effectively it’s used. 

Third, Asian philanthropic hubs. As traditional Western aid declines, Asian philanthropic centers are gaining influence. Indian metros like Mumbai and Delhi have already demonstrated they can host world-class philanthropic institutions. The question is whether that capacity can be built beyond the major cities—and whether India can learn from places like Singapore or Bangkok that are developing their own philanthropic ecosystems. 

Here’s the number that should grab your attention: the report estimates that targeted investments in this enabling infrastructure could unlock ₹125,000 crore to ₹135,000 crore ($14 billion to $15 billion) in additional philanthropic capital by FY30. 

That’s not small change. That’s nearly doubling current private giving. 

The Human Element 

Behind all these numbers and projections, there’s something simpler at work: a shift in how wealthy Indians think about their role in the country’s development. 

I’ve spent time with several of the families the report profiles, and what strikes me is how personal this has become. The younger generation isn’t writing checks to distant charities. They’re visiting projects. They’re talking to beneficiaries. They’re asking hard questions about what works and what doesn’t. 

One family I know shifted their entire giving strategy after the daughter spent a summer working with a rural education nonprofit. Another family brought in outside experts to audit their portfolio after the son pointed out that they had no idea whether their education grants were actually improving learning outcomes. 

This is the human insight that the aggregate data misses. Yes, wealth is being institutionalized. Yes, family offices are on the rise. Yes, governance is improving. But underneath all of that is something more fundamental: a generation that wants its wealth to mean something. 

What Viksit Bharat Actually Requires 

The report frames its findings in terms of “Viksit Bharat”—the vision of a developed India. But it wisely avoids the trap of suggesting that philanthropy alone can deliver development. 

Instead, the argument is more nuanced: private philanthropy, done well, can do things that government funding can’t. It can take risks on unproven approaches. It can move faster than bureaucracy allows. It can focus on the hardest problems in the hardest places. It can build institutions that outlast political cycles. 

But none of that happens automatically. It requires what the report calls “durable philanthropic institutions”—organizations with the capacity, credibility, and staying power to turn money into impact at scale. 

Right now, India doesn’t have enough of those institutions. The ones that exist are concentrated in a few cities. The organizations that could benefit most from their support often don’t know they exist or can’t access them. 

The Step Change 

The report’s subtitle is “The step change India needs.” That’s the right framing. Incremental improvement won’t close a ₹16 lakh crore gap. India needs something fundamentally different. 

What would that look like? It would look like family offices treating philanthropy as seriously as they treat investment management. It would look like diaspora networks that connect money to expertise to on-the-ground execution. It would look like philanthropic institutions in Patna and Raipur and Guwahati that are just as sophisticated as those in Mumbai and Delhi. 

It would look, in other words, like infrastructure. 

The Bain and Dasra teams have been writing this report for years, tracking the evolution of Indian philanthropy with increasing sophistication. This year’s edition feels different—more urgent, more specific about what’s required. 

Maybe that’s because the gap is widening. Maybe it’s because the opportunity is clearer. Maybe it’s because the authors have seen enough families make the shift to know it’s possible. 

Whatever the reason, the message is unmistakable: India has the wealth. India has the will. What India needs now is the way—the infrastructure that turns good intentions into lasting change. 

The next decade will show whether we build it.