Stonewall loss of jobs and funding after US aid cuts

I do wonder how much of a factor funding was back in 2014(?) when Stonewall were deciding whether they should focus on the 'T', or whether it would be better to focus on LGB issues abroard?

I think this also shows how an ideology that sprouted in the US can be embedded (or at least helping this to happen) into other countries via funding.

Unless of course they were siphoning money off into other, critical areas of the organisation.

Which they would never do.

If I was Mrs Rory Stewart and my funding was withdrawn for that ridiculous project, I would have thought, hey, the grift was good while it lasted. All good things come to an end.

I definitely would not have chucked an indignant hissy fit and drawn attention to what millions of USAID dollars was actually funding. Her husband carried on like funding was being withdrawn for some vital work, not teaching Afghan peasants about why urinals can be art.

It literally can't be critical to their operations, because it is attached to a specific project in Eastern Europe.

My guess would be that funding has fallen substantially across multiple streams but they would prefer to blame Trump/the US government than admit their credibility is shot.

That sounds like it could be a good point. I was surprised, when I got into the article, to read how small the amount of US funding is that they have had in the past and will be losing in future. Surely it can't be critical to their operations?

My guess would be that funding has fallen substantially across multiple streams but they would prefer to blame Trump/the US government than admit their credibility is shot.

YY, exactly.

Stonewall seem to be trying to spin what is actually a failure on Stonewall’s part as being about Trump’s anti-DEI efforts.

GEF gave them £233k last year. That is not nearly enough money to fund the 50+ staff they are claiming they will need to lay off.

Stonewall are looking at large layoffs because of the cratering of support and a failure to face the reality of what that means in terms of money.

Stonewall’s income is down by £2M a year since 2018 (since which time costs have skyrocketed). They have lost far more from their donations (down over 20% just from 2023 to 2024) than they will from GEF. And even more from fees and program income which are both down by significant amounts. Over all their revenue is has plummeted over the last few years from about £8.7M in 2018 to £6.9 in 2024.

And as income has fallen, instead of adjusting services they have eaten through reserves. They had assets of nearly £5M in 2018. It was less than £1M in 2024.

If they continued to spend the way they have been they would become insolvent in the next year or so even if they had kept the GEF funding.

Rory was extremely annoyed that Trump had interrupted the funding that Mrs Rory needs to lecture Afghans about conceptual art.

Ooh did they - fucking excellent.

I haven't laughed so hard since... well, since the other day when they defunded Rory Stewart's wife.

Agree.

The funding also seems to be attached to a specific project, so I think would be 'reserved funds' and couldn't just be spent on general overheads.

The GEF funds Stonewall’s Alliance Against Hate Crime project in Georgia, Romania and Bulgaria, which the charity said worked to “improve support for victims of hate crime, and to advance dialogue with police and law enforcement stakeholders on adapting their systems and victim support to be more sensitive to the needs of the LGBTQ+ community”.

My guess would be that funding has fallen substantially across multiple streams but they would prefer to blame Trump/the US government than admit their credibility is shot.

That’s what I thought.

Presumably this

The amount brought in from public bodies also increased to more than £600,000.

There is undoubtedly good work they could have been (and possibly have been) doing overseas to advance LGB acceptance. Wonder that we never hear about this (but are informed that X country is hostile to gay people so they come here for refuge). I've read however that there has been pushback in some african nations (and possibly elsewhere) on outsiders pushing LGBT matters where against the local culture, and it can be considered as another form of colonialism,* so perhaps the whole LGBT aid movement needs a rethink.

*which is odd if, as TRAs claim, the notion of two sexes was invented by white people 🙄

This is accurate. I've been following this closely for a while.

Well Stonewall ALREADY were on track for a massive staff cut as they were ALREADY in financial trouble.

Stonewall were clearly no longer about the people they were supposed to represent and had ceased to be a grassroots organisation there more for the benefit of its own staff than anyone else.

Have they not also got to face Alison Bailey in crt again

Re the strange currents of aid/funding, I used to work for a small local third-sector organisation whose nominal function was to support other third-sector organisations by helping them build up their skills and infrastructure.

All that my boss ever did was work out how to source govt funding by making bids and proposals that seemed to match the funding criteria. Then we faffed around doing unneeded and unhelpful stuff that delivered on the details of the funding agreement without actually responding to any organically expressed need.

The charities/voluntary groups in my location hated us, because we were just an additional layer that absorbed funding that they felt should have come directly to them.

From the govt's point of view, I think we only existed to make Cameron's 'Big Society' initiative look as if it was sincere. From our own point of view, we existed in order to exist - i.e. to attract the funding that paid our costs. Was horrible.

I suspect even without the T organisations that just support gay rights will be cut by Trump/Musk.
What did Stonewall even do with all those staff?

My guess would be that funding has fallen substantially across multiple streams but they would prefer to blame Trump/the US government than admit their credibility is shot.

It's not only Government Depts that have abandoned the diversity champions scheme. Commercial companies large and small are stepping away and will continue to do so.

It's very sad given the positive work they have done over the years that they have abandoned L and G and ended up as a bullying force for the T.

Cheers @GriefSubmittedHighways . The international aid scene is very interesting.

Some of it supports vital humanitarian and genuinely interesting cultural work. Some of it, if I was an American citizen, I would be scratching my head and why my tax dollars were being spent on musicals in other countries.

I am not sure I agree that Stonewall was parasitised by the trans movement. I think they have more culpability than this. They saw that with gay marriage secured, they would struggle to compete for grants and donations. They could have gone more heavily into work overseas, but instead they chose to ride the trans bandwagon to generate income in the UK. And that is how we ended up with the hideousness of the diversity champion scheme.

I wonder will the likes of Ruth Hunt ever admit this to herself.

Cross-post, @Taytoface ! You said it more concisely!

I can't feel any glee if Stonewall is at risk of going under, if it really is true that it is doing good work in countries where LGB people (and T for that matter) are facing persecution and marginalisation.
But what a strange funding ecosystem, where the US is giving money to a global entity which gives money to a UK entity to support people in central Europe.
It is hard to avoid thinking that it is the strange money tides and currents, rather than truly evidence-based assessments of need, that dictate policy in this ecosystem. Presumably that is part of the reason why a once-great organisation like Stonewall got itself in such a tangle.
Stonewall, too, is a victim in all this. Really, it is Patient Zero - the first organisation to succumb to the parasitising nature of transactivism. I feel like mourning it for what it was, rather than celebrating the current difficulties. Especially given that the trump funding cuts are also causing catastrophic problems for much-needed and valuable aid initiatives in other areas.

I'm sorry, but I can't celebrate this. The work outlined in the paper sounds both worthy and necessary. Advancing the rights of LGB and even T people in countries where they don't have equal rights is what they should have been doing instead of insisting that men can become women, and not only women, but the most vulnerable women in the land.

And now, because of this madness genuinely vulnerable people will suffer. This makes me sad, not jubilant.

Oh dear.