According to the CAF World Giving Index — the annual global index measuring charitable giving, volunteering, and helping strangers — Lithuania ranked among the lowest-rated countries in the world in 2024. And yet, at the same time, we were among the five most generous supporters of Ukraine relative to GDP.
This paradox says a great deal about who we are when it comes to philanthropy: a society capable of mobilizing extraordinary resources in moments of existential crisis, yet still unaccustomed to consistent, everyday giving. Are we strong in times of crisis, but weak in routine?
As someone actively involved in philanthropy, I make daily decisions about where foundation funding should go, who we should partner with, and how to measure whether we have created meaningful impact. That is why today I am raising a question that, I believe, matters to an increasingly large part of Lithuanian society: are we beginning to mature into a modern culture of philanthropy — one where we do not simply react impulsively, but instead create measurable, long-term change?
A Long Tradition of Philanthropy Overshadowed by the Soviet Era — and the Changes Happening Today
It is important to understand that philanthropy in Lithuania is not some imported Western trend. Since the times of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, patronage and charitable support were an integral part of public life, while during the interwar period private support for education and culture was considered completely natural.
What interrupted this tradition was not a lack of wealth, but the Soviet occupation. Over five decades, people were systematically taught that social welfare was exclusively the responsibility of the state — and this mindset remains deeply rooted to this day.
A 2024 study published in the journal Voluntas confirms this directly: the legacy of the Soviet era continues to strongly influence the development of civil society in Lithuania. “I pay taxes — let the state handle it” remains a commonly heard phrase, and it is one of the greatest obstacles faced by anyone trying to build a sustainable culture of philanthropy.
Still, change is happening — and it is visible in the numbers, even if the overall picture remains complex.
Over the past several years, the amount donated through Lithuania’s 1.2% personal income tax allocation mechanism has grown from approximately €22 million in 2020 to around €37 million in 2024, largely due to rising wages. Nearly 500,000 taxpayers allocated support, although the number of participants itself has not significantly increased.
At the same time, the number of charitable foundations has expanded. Today, approximately 1,500 charity and support foundations are registered in Lithuania. Furthermore, the personal income tax reform that came into effect on January 1, 2025 — limiting eligibility for support only to officially registered NGOs — despite political debate, signals something important: the infrastructure of philanthropy is becoming more professionalized.
A New Generation of Philanthropic Entrepreneurs
Perhaps the most significant shift is happening not at the regulatory level, but among people themselves. A new generation of entrepreneurial philanthropists is emerging, changing the very understanding of what it means to give back.
Over the last several years, Lithuania has witnessed major business exits, the rapid growth of the startup ecosystem, and the rise of individuals who have achieved financial success and are now asking themselves: How can I contribute back to society?
Examples include Devbridge Foundation, the Kazickas Family Foundation with its decades-long investment in Lithuanian education, the Vilnius University Endowment Fund with rapidly growing investments, and the Tesonet Foundation with its “AI Generation” initiative.
All of this demonstrates that we are no longer talking about isolated enthusiasts, but about a growing movement. Most importantly, everyone in this field brings their own perspective on how to create impact more effectively — which means there is far greater opportunity for collaboration and learning than for competition.
Challenges We Cannot Ignore
Still, we must be honest with ourselves: the road ahead remains long, and the challenges are not limited to public mindset alone.
Many of the obstacles are structural and concrete.
In Lithuania, individuals cannot reduce their taxable income through charitable donations. Instead, the country relies on the 1.2% income tax allocation mechanism. Businesses, however, are allowed to deduct donated amounts twice from taxable income, making philanthropy significantly more attractive for companies than for private individuals.
As a result, incentives for individual donors remain limited and indirect, making it difficult to expect a deeply rooted culture of personal charitable giving.
A lack of transparency further complicates the situation. Lithuania has tens of thousands of registered non-profit organizations, yet only a portion of them function as truly active civic organizations.
According to data from the Social Impact Alliance for CEE, only around one in six organizations publicly reports on its activities. This creates a vacuum of trust that directly affects people’s willingness to contribute.
Interestingly, trust in NGOs in Lithuania is steadily increasing. A recent representative public opinion survey conducted by “Vilmorus” found that roughly one-third of respondents trust non-governmental organizations. Compared with other sectors and institutions, NGOs ranked third in public trust.
Yet only around 44–50% of taxpayers actually allocate their 1.2% tax contribution to organizations. This means that roughly half of taxpayers do not use this opportunity at all.
The gap between declared trust and real action is striking.
Education: A Gap the State Alone Cannot Solve
If someone asked me where philanthropy in Lithuania can create the most meaningful and measurable impact today, my answer would be immediate: education — especially in the regions.
And not because it is fashionable, but because the data is unforgiving.
Results from the 2022 PISA study revealed major disparities in student achievement between schools of different socioeconomic backgrounds in Lithuania. The gap reaches approximately 60–70 points — a difference experts often equate to nearly two academic years of learning.
At the same time, Lithuania faces an aging teaching workforce: nearly half of all teachers are aged 50 or older, while younger educators increasingly consider leaving the profession altogether.
These are not isolated issues, but deep structural challenges within the education system.
The state is responding. The “Millennium Schools” program — backed by more than €200 million in EU and government funding — includes dozens of municipalities and hundreds of schools, representing an important step forward.
But the state cannot solve everything alone.
This is precisely where philanthropy can become a true partner — capable of moving faster, acting more flexibly, and experimenting where bureaucratic systems cannot keep pace.
And this is not just theory. Our own experience confirms it.
When we began developing our strategy for where meaningful impact could be created, the answer was clear: the regions.
Not because major cities lack problems, but because a child growing up in Pasvalys or Plungė often simply does not have access to opportunities that are considered normal in Vilnius or Kaunas.
In practice, we discovered an even deeper issue: regional communities lack not only financial resources, but also teachers, methodological support, and access to technology. Only 31% of children from rural areas plan to pursue university education.
From Reaction to Investment in Long-Term Change
For a long time, philanthropy in Lithuania was reactive: something happened, people responded emotionally, donated money, and that support mattered.
But real transformation begins when philanthropy evolves from emotional reaction into a long-term investment in solving a specific problem — with a clear strategy, strong partnerships, and measurable impact.
This is not only about money. It is also about expertise, technology, time, and mentorship.
And it requires answering one crucial question: Where can we create the greatest impact?
For us, the answer always leads back to the regions and the younger generation — to children who lack access to knowledge and technology, to teenagers who have never been told they could build a business of their own, and to Lithuanian culture that deserves to be seen more broadly than we sometimes believe ourselves.
Everyone trying to answer this same question discovers their own direction. And when I see more and more like-minded people walking a similar path, I realize: this is no longer the work of isolated enthusiasts.
Lithuania’s culture of philanthropy is not yet fully formed, but it is developing faster than many realize.
Increasingly, entrepreneurs are not only voting during elections and hoping problems will be solved — they are also voting with their money: identifying concrete problems and investing their own resources to address them.
The real turning point will come when most of us move from asking “Should I donate?” to asking “What kind of change do I want to create?”
And I sincerely believe that this shift is already happening.