FAIR SHARE
Monitor 2024
Founded on the premise that making disparities transparent is a first step to advocate for gender equity, FAIR SHARE has been annually measuring the representation of women in leadership in the largest and most well-known international organisations since 2019 through the FAIR SHARE Monitor. Since then, we’ve evolved into an organisation that not only advocates for gender equity in the social impact sector, but also pushes for a restructuration of the sector based on feminist leadership principles.
So, what is the state of gender equity in the social impact sector in 2024 and how has it evolved, if at all, since we started monitoring the sector in 2019?
As we celebrate FAIR SHARE’s five-year anniversary, we are pleased to present the 6th edition of the FAIR SHARE Monitor, along with our learnings of monitoring the sector and trends we’ve observed over the years.
About the FAIR SHARE Monitor
The FAIR SHARE Monitor is a data-based tool that measures and tracks gender equity in the international social impact sector. Based on data we either receive from organisations or research for them, we create a ranking of organisations based on the proportion of women in their leadership. The progress, stagnation or regress of each organisation is measured and made transparent from year to year – making the FAIR SHARE Monitor a tool with which both individual organisations and the sector can hold themselves accountable to gender equity.
This year, the publication of the FAIR SHARE Monitor has a special significance: this sixth edition of the Monitor marks FAIR SHARE’s 5th anniversary as a feminist organisation working towards gender equity and feminist leadership. While an increasing number of organisations continue to opt for transparency and accountability regarding women’s representation in their structure by choosing to participate in the FAIR SHARE Monitor, we also acknowledge that there is still a long way to go before the international social impact sector walks the talk on intersectional gender equity.
Overview of the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024
What is the Monitor data collection process like?
As with previous Monitor editions, various organisations from around the world were invited to participate in this sixth edition of the FAIR SHARE Monitor. This time around, a total of 104 organisations working in various sectors including healthcare, human rights, climate & the environment, children & youth, international cooperation and more, were invited to participate. These organisations were invited to share data on the gender make-up of their staff and leadership teams, as well as more general information about their internal organisational culture via an online survey.
Typically, when organisations do not provide data, we research the necessary information on their websites and other public platforms. In the process, we assume a 70% proportion of women on staff when exact numbers aren’t available. The researched data is then shared with the respective organisation for a chance to confirm or amend the data where necessary.
When data isn’t confirmed by organisations, we publish the researched findings and differentiate, in our Monitor publication, between organisations who actively participated in data collection through either data submission or data confirmation, and those who did not respond to any of our data inquiries.
When we are unable to find sufficient gender data on organisations through research, the organisations are removed from the Monitor analysis and results publication. This year, 9 organisations were removed from the Monitor due to insufficient gender data.
For the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024, this process led to the monitoring of a total of 95 international organisations, for an estimated total staff size of over 260,000 employees.
What data is collected through the FAIR SHARE Monitor?
To measure women’s representation in social impact organisations and better understand their culture, we collect data on the gender make-up of their different organisational levels as well as general information on their internal structure and culture. For the Monitor 2024, this included:
- Overall Staff gender distribution (women, men, non-binary)
- Middle Management gender distribution
- Senior Management Team gender distribution
- Board gender distribution
- BIWOC representation in staff, Senior Management Team and Board
- Organisation’s scope of work
- Internal Diversity, Equity and Inclusion mechanisms
- Outcomes from past Monitor results if applicable.
How has the Monitor evolved over the years?
Black, Brown, Indigenous women and women of colour
Throughout the years, internal reflections and invaluable feedback from our community of monitored organisations have enabled us to make essential adjustments to the FAIR SHARE Monitor. In 2020, we made the commitment to make the Monitor more intersectional by including race in our data collection process. This commitment laid the foundation for measuring the representation of Black, Brown, Indigenous women and women of colour (BIWOC) in the FAIR SHARE Monitor in 2021. Despite the challenges related to collecting data on race at the international level, we’ve managed to measure BIWOC’s representation in leadership for the past four years and continue to think about better ways of capturing the diversity of women in the social impact sector.
Gender inclusivity
In keeping with our aspirations of making the Monitor an intersectional tool for gender equity, we committed to make non-binary staff members visible in our data collection process by expanding the Monitor gender categories in 2023. This came after feedback from members of our community, committed organisations in particular, who advocated for non-binary and gender non-confirming employees of the sector to be reflected in the FAIR SHARE Monitor. Ultimately, the FAIR SHARE Monitor ranking remains focused on women’s leadership. However, collecting data on non-binary employees has uncovered the numerous challenges organisations themselves face in collecting and reporting this data given the various safety concerns of those involved. Our aim moving forward is to continue making the Monitor gender-inclusive and reflect on ways to make the Monitor data collection process safer for non-binary and gender non-conforming individuals.
Middle Management
The latest addition to the FAIR SHARE Monitor is the introduction of Middle Management in the Monitor data collection process. While our approach to women’s leadership, and subsequent Monitor ranking, remains focused on the top leadership of organisations (i.e. Senior Management Teams and Boards), we also acknowledge that tracking the gender distribution of organisations’ Middle Management is a significant step towards developing a more comprehensive picture of women’s contribution to and leadership journey in the social impact sector.
Thematic focus
In the last few Monitors, we’ve attempted to cluster monitor organisations based in their scope of work. While the diversity of the international sector makes it difficult to come up with neat categories to classify organisations, we nonetheless managed to identify six broad categories for the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024:
- International Cooperation & International Aid (24% of monitored organisations)
- Health & Welfare (16%)
- Climate & Environment (11%)
- Human Rights / Civil Rights / Promotion of democracy (9.5%)
- Children & youth (9.5%)
- Women’s and girls’ rights / Gender equality (6%)
- Other (24%)
Transparency: A major motivation for participation
This anniversary edition of the FAIR SHARE Monitor included a total of 95 international organisations, of which 42 actively participated in data collection. This is the highest number of organisations included in the Monitor since its inception in 2019 as well as the highest number of organisations submitting their data to the FAIR SHARE Monitor. As an organisation founded on the premise that the social impact sector ought to be transparent about women’s representation in its structure and subsequently held accountable to gender equity, this rising monitor participation figure makes us particularly hopeful. Indeed, it reinforces an observation from the past couple of years: a growing number of organisations are concerned about transparency and equitable gender representation and are interested in addressing gaps in their internal structures.
For the first time in the FAIR SHARE Monitor, we inquired about organisations’ motivations for participating in the Monitor. For the majority of organisations who submitted their data for the Monitor 2024 (74%), contributing to transparency around women’s representation in leadership is a major reason for participation. Other reported reasons include the need to track one’s organisation’s progress towards gender equity as well as holding one’s organisation accountable to gender equity.
While these findings do not reveal much about reasons for non-participation by other organisations, they do indicate that for organisations dedicated to gender equity, the need for transparency around women’s representation is strong, and the FAIR SHARE Monitor can be a tool for transparency when internal mechanisms aren’t available.
Women leaders in over half of monitored organisations despite persistent representation gap
Five years later and six editions in, the FAIR SHARE Monitor still records a notable gap between women in the sector’s general workforce and women in leadership positions. For organisations in the Monitor 2024, women accounted for 63% of staff against 51% in leadership on average. In contrast, men represented 36% of organisations’ staff against 49% of their leadership and had, on average, 2 times more chances of being in a leadership position than women (men comparative advantage).
Since we’ve launched the FAIR SHARE Monitor in 2019, a key metric we’ve been interested in has been women’s leadership. Hence, we’ve been tracking the proportion of women who occupy positions in organisations’ high decision-making spaces, namely Senior Management Teams and Boards. This also involves recording the number of women who specifically hold CEO/Executive Director as well as Chair positions on organisations’ Boards.
For the first time since we started monitoring women’s leadership in the social impact sector, we observe that over half of monitored organisations are headed by women. Indeed, 52% of monitored organisations have at least one woman CEO or Executive Director. However, among organisations with more than one CEO/Executive Director, only 15% had at least half of all CEO positions held by women.
Generally, women in this Monitor make up 55% of Senior Management Teams on average, and 57% of monitored organisations have majority-women Senior Management Teams.
Similarly, for the first time in the Monitor’s history, more than half of boards are chaired by women, with 52% of Boards headed by at least one woman.
On average, women in the Monitor 2024 represent 49% of Board members and 41% of boards have a majority of women members. However, it is worth mentioning that similarly to previous Monitors, board memberships continue to be dominated by men (51% of majority-men boards).
Monitoring Middle Management: Overview of women’s leadership journey in the sector
For the first time in the FAIR SHARE Monitor, we collected data on the gender distribution of organisations’ Middle Management Teams. While we acknowledge that an increasing number of organisations are opting for less hierarchical leadership structures, for a harmonised approach across organisations, a high-level definition of Middle Management was proposed to organisations. Thus, in the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024, Middle Management is used to refer to employees who oversee fellow employees but are not involved in high decision-making processes concerning the organisation.
While most organisations (83%) reported having similar internal definitions of middle management, a minority reported additional considerations in defining middle management. Among these, we note a few organisations having adopted less hierarchical and more decentralised leadership models which in some cases meant an increase in managerial responsibilities without having to report to hirer management. To this, we should add that in the international context in which the FAIR SHARE Monitor evolves, developing a one-size-fits-all definition organisations across geographies and managerial cultures can prove challenging.
Nonetheless, while this organisational level is not accounted for in the Monitor’s leadership calculations, measuring Middle Management gender distribution allows us to provide tangible answers to a key question that has steered the development of the FAIR SHARE Monitor: does women’s representation decrease as one moves up organisational levels?
Given the diversity of organisational structures present in the FAIR SHARE Monitor, 35 organisations reported having a middle management structure and of these, 29 were able to provide data on their middle management gender composition.
In this sample, women represent 59% of staff while the average percentage of women in Middle Management is 58%. However, with an average of 55% of women in leadership (accounting for both SMT and Boards), the repartition of women in this 29-organisations sample confirms our initial hypothesis on women’s leadership: as decision-making opportunities increase, women’s representation decreases.
To contrast these findings, we looked into men’s representation in different organisational levels and observed an opposite trend. Indeed, while men represent 40% of staff on average, they make up 41% of middle management and 45% of leadership. This translates into a 5 percentage points increase in men’s representation from staff to leadership while women’s representation decreases by 4 percentage points.
In line with our commitment to gender-inclusivity, our analysis of Middle Mangement included additional categories such as non-binary and gender-diverse people. Unfortunately, due to insufficient data available on non-binary employees, only an average of 1% was reported at the staff and middle management levels. At the leadership level, organisations were either unable to share this data due to safety reasons for their employees, or because data was simply inexistent.
So, how did women fare in the Monitor 2024?
As part of the monitoring process, organisations are ranked based on their individual FAIR SHARE Index. The FAIR SHARE Index makes visible the gap between the proportion of women in staff and the proportion of women in leadership positions at Senior Management and Board levels. An organisation is said to have a fair representation of women in its leadership when it has a FAIR SHARE Index of 15 or lower.
For this anniversary edition of the FAIR SHARE Monitor, the average FAIR SHARE Index for 95 monitored organisations is 19.92, significantly higher than the ideal Index value of 15 or lower established by the FAIR SHARE Monitor.
Less than half (47%) of the 95 monitored organisations had a FAIR representation of women in leadership. In the majority of organisations (53%), women continue to struggle with being fairly represented in leadership. Since the last Monitor, 15 organisations have managed to decrease their FAIR SHARE Index below the 15-value threshold, whereas 8 organisations lost their fair representation status due to a higher index.
Generally, 32% of organisations have improved their FAIR SHARE Index since the last time they were monitored. This progress is assessed based on the number of organisations who have had a decrease of at least 10% in their FAIR SHARE Index since the last time they were monitored, bringing them closer to the ideal index threshold.
On the other hand, 33% of organisations experienced a regress in their women’s representation, which is equivalent to an increase of at least 10% in their FAIR SHARE Index. The proportion of organisations that experienced no change is at a low 9%, while 26% of organisations are being monitored for the first time.
Feminist Leadership and women’s representation
For some years now, the FAIR SHARE Monitor has been exploring organisations’ internal leadership culture. At the same time as we aspire to a social impact sector mirroring the values of equity and justice and fairly representing women at all organisational levels, we also advocate for a transformation of the sector’s culture through feminist leadership.
In the Monitor 2024, only 13 organisations (14%) reported having implemented feminist leadership in their internal structure. When digging deeper into organisations’ definition of feminist leadership, common themes around diversity, inclusion, people-centred approaches as well as the deconstruction of power emerge. As part of their feminist approach to leadership, some organisations mentioned actively promoting women’s leadership without however providing additional details on what this looks like internally. For others, a feminist leadership culture involved carrying out internal conversations around feminist leadership and developing charters on internal feminist principles for the organisation to follow. This reinforces the Monitor 2023’s findings that while a growing number of organisations are aware of and interested in feminist leadership, they can differ significantly in their understanding and application of the concept.
Nonetheless, when cross-analysing organisations who self-reported applying feminist leadership and their respective FAIR SHARE Index, we noted that the majority (9 out of 13) had a fair representation of women in their leadership. This invites the hypothesis that organisations who have internal conversations and internal mechanisms around feminist practices may be more likely to be intentional about gender equity in their internal structure, and hence have an equitable representation of women in their leadership. We hope that growing data on organisations’ practices of feminist leadership will shed more light on this matter.
Gender inclusivity still difficult to assess
Since 2023, in line with our commitment to develop the FAIR SHARE Monitor into a more intersectional and inclusive tool, we’ve been accounting for non-binary staff in our data collection process. Though our FAIR SHARE Index calculations and subsequent monitor ranking remain focused on women’s representation in the sector’s leadership, collecting data on non-binary staff over the past couple of years has allowed us to make a few observations.
In the Monitor 2024, only 26% of organisations make it possible for employees to report a gender identity other than woman or man. This includes options such as non-binary and “other”. In the same breath, 31% of organisations reported allowing employees to report a gender identity different from their legal gender status. As representatives explained, depending on the country and its legislation, such openness to gender expansiveness may be hard to implement. To all this must be added the fact that for many non-binary employees, reporting their gender identity remain a choice to consider carefully given the potential safety and discrimination implications this may have. Moreover, among organisations who reported collecting data on their non-binary staff, a few also reported not being able to share this data with us citing privacy reasons, adding to the overall difficulty of presenting robust findings on non-binary employees in the FAIR SHARE Monitor.
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and women’s representation
In our attempt to better understand organisations’ internal cultures, we have been inquiring about the existence of internal anti-discrimination or gender equity policies for a few years now. Consequently, we’ve found that 45% of all monitored organisations had some form of internal policy against various forms of discrimination and/or to promote gender equity internally.
When cross-analysing against the FAIR SHARE Index, we found that the majority (63%) had a fair representation of women in their leadership. Similarly to the findings of organisations with feminist leadership practices, these figures also push for more reflections regarding the potential correlations or even causations that may exist between pro-gender equity internal policies and the effective fair representation of women in decision-making roles.
Does organisation size matter?
For the second time in the Monitor history, organisations were categorised by staff size. This time around, organisations were separated into three size clusters: Small for organisations with 100 employees or less; Medium for organisations with a total number of employees between 101 and 1000; and Large for organisations with over 1000 employees. By clustering organisations, our aim is not only to uncover the differences in women representation based on organisations’ staff size, but also to allow organisations to benchmark themselves against comparable organisations in the sector. As it was rightfully pointed out by past monitored organisations, a general ranking of all organisations regardless of size does not account for the various cross-country staffing and management challenges that organisations face as their operations and staff needs increase.
Small organisations leading the way
22 small organisations accounted for 23% of all monitored organisations, with an average percentage of women on staff of 67% against 60% of women in leadership. The majority of small organisations in the Monitor 2024 are led by women, with 68% of organisations with a woman CEO/Executive Director, and 59% of Boards with a Chairwoman. These organisations are also characterised by a majority of women both in their Senior Management Teams (SMT) and their Boards. Indeed, in 73% of small organisations, women represent more than half of Senior Management Team members, while organisations with a majority of women Board members represent 64% of all small organisations.
With this representation of women in leadership, small organisations have the lowest average FAIR SHARE Index at 15.21, the closest to the FAIR SHARE Index benchmark of 15 or lower. Moreover, with a comparative advantage of 1.4, men in small organisations have, on average, 1.4 times more chances of attaining a leadership position than women, which is significantly lower than the overall Monitor average of 2.0.
Though these figures may illustrate a more equitable representation of women leaders compared to larger organisations, they hide stark disparities among small organisations. Indeed, while the lowest FAIR SHARE Index for small organisations sits at 0.96 for an organisation with about 96 employees, the highest index is 65.01 for an organisation with about 50 employees. The staff size of these two organisations and the latter higher index value representing more than four times the average of the cluster confirms our earlier arguments that size alone cannot be to blame for the poor representation of women in organisations’ leadership.
Medium organisations: Home to both lowest and highest FAIR SHARE Indexes
Medium organisations account for 45% of organisations in the Monitor 2024, representing the largest cluster. For these organisations, the average percentage of women on staff is 63% against 49% of women in leadership. In comparison with small organisations, we observe a decline in women’s leadership, with 51% of organisations having a women CEO/Executive Director, and 51% of Boards having a Chairwoman. This declining trend continues when looking into the composition of leadership bodies with 51% of medium-sized Senior Management Teams being women-dominated, and most Boards (51%) having men members.
For medium organisations, the average FAIR SHARE Index is 21.01, considerably higher than the average 19.92 of the overall Monitor 2024, and highlighting a significant gap between women’s representation in medium organisations’ staff and leadership. In these organisations, men have 2.1 more chances of attaining a leadership position than women (comparative advantage).
Similarly to small organisations, medium organisations also present significant disparities among themselves when it comes to women’s leadership representation and subsequent organisational indexes. Indeed, the lowest FAIR SHARE Index among medium organisations is 0.53, also the lowest index in the Monitor 2024, while the highest index, of both this cluster and the Monitor overall, is at 82.5.
Large organisations struggling with fair women’s representation
Last but not least, large organisations, with over 1000 employees, account for 32% of all monitored organisations, with an average percentage of women on staff of 61% against 47% in leadership. Here, the declining representation of women in leadership continues, with 40% of large organisations having a women CEO/Executive Director, and 47% of Boards having a Chairwoman. This drop is further exacerbated in leadership bodies with majority-women Senior Management Teams present in 53% of large organisations, and women-dominated Boards representing 27%.
Furthermore, the average FAIR SHARE Index of large organisations is 21.83, also higher than the average Monitor 2024’s and confirming, without excusing it, organisations’ challenges with maintaining gender equitable leadership representation the larger their staff size. Unsurprisingly, men’s chances of holding leadership positions in large organisations are also higher, at 2.3 (comparative advantage).
Among large organisations, the lowest FAIR SHARE Index is 1.12, while the highest index is 54.57, confirming yet again that a larger staff size isn’t necessarily an impediment to fair gender representation.
About a third of women’s leadership positions held by BIWOC
For the first time since we started monitoring the representation of Black, Brown, Indigenous women and women of colour (BIWOC) in the FAIR SHARE Monitor in 2021, we analysed data on BIWOC staff and BIWOC board members separately. This came about after numerous feedback from participating organisations emphasising the challenging nature of collecting data on race at different organisational levels. Indeed, for some organisations, while race data may be available, collecting it at the staff, Senior Management Team or even at the Board level can prove challenging as this information is often optional to provide. At the Board level, the option is sometimes not even given for members to report their race, making this data inexistent in many organisations.
BIWOC Staff
For the Monitor 2024, we were able to collect data on BIWOC staff for a total of 61 organisations, which represents 64% of all monitored organisations. Among these organisations, women held 49% of all leadership positions. BIWOC held about 36% of women leadership positions, which is only about 18% of all leadership positions across the 61 organisations with BIWOC staff data.
Among organisations with BIWOC staff data, 52% were led by women, with at least one woman in a CEO or Executive Director position. Among women-led organisations, BIWOC CEOs or Executive Directors were represented in about 44% of organisations, a significant progression from past years. Breaking these figures into organisational size shows that the majority of organisations with a BIWOC CEO or Executive Director are in the small cluster (43%).
BIWOC Board Members
When looking specifically into data on BIWOC board members, 41 organisations were identified as having complete and exploitable data. The majority of these (54%) were medium-sized organisations.
Among organisations with race data on Board members, 56% had chairwomen, of which 33% were chaired by women of colour. Again, medium-sized organisations made up most of organisations with BIWOC chairs (56%).
While these findings, and the trends on the general availability of data on Black, Brown, Indigenous women and women of colour are encouraging, it is evident that organisations in the social impact sector ought to do more to achieve meaningful intersectional gender equity in leadership.
FAIR SHARE Commitment and women representation
The FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024 counts 35 committed organisations, making up 37% of all monitored organisations. 27 committed organisations submitted their data for the Monitor and together, they account for 64% of overall active participation in the Monitor 2024. Besides their encouraging participation rate, committed organisations also stand out for their overall fair representation of women leaders, with an average FAIR SHARE Index of 13.37, and 23 committed organisations having a FAIR SHARE Index well below the recommended 15.0 value.
49% of committed organisations are medium-sized, making organisations with an employee size between 101 and 1000 employees the dominant cluster among organisations who have made the commitment to achieve gender equity in their leadership by 2030. This is followed by organisations with 100 employees or less (small) who make up 37% of all committed organisations. Unfortunately, large organisations are a minority among organisations who pledged to achieve equitable leadership through the FAIR SHARE Commitment, with only 5 large organisations accounted for.
When cross-referencing organisations’ commitment status and their average FAIR SHARE Index, the majority of organisations who have both signed the FAIR SHARE Commitment and have a fair representation of women in their leadership (Index of 15 or less) are medium-sized organisations, making up 48% of committed organisations with a fair share of women in leadership.
While the positive performance of committed organisations is commendable, it nonetheless sparks an important debate regarding organisations’ attitude towards the FAIR SHARE Commitment. An important question we’ve been asking ourselves as the number of committed organisations has been growing over the years and as we’ve been committed to improving data quality is: are organisations with an already fair representation of women in leadership more likely to sign the FAIR SHARE Commitment?
To better understand organisations’ attitude towards the Commitment, we attempted to understand why some organisations actively participate in the data collection year after year without signing the pledge to achieve equitable women’s representation in leadership. While the number of responses was relatively low given the already low participation rate among non-committed organisations, the few responses we did receive shed an important light. Organisations cited reasons such as needing to hire DEI personnel before having the capacity to sign the commitment; or having existing internal gender equity monitoring mechanisms that made signing the Commitment redundant.
They have committed to gender equity
Organisations who have signed the FAIR SHARE Commitment
Sign the FAIR SHARE Commitment and join over 30 of your peers in their efforts to achieve gender equity in the sector by 2030.
FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024 Ranking
The social impact sector is doing remarkable work to foster equity and justice, but this ambition is not always evident in international organisations internal leadership structures and cultures. By annually measuring the representation of women in the sector and making transparent where organisations are in their journey towards gender equity, the FAIR SHARE Monitor aims to increase accountability and foster change to achieve this goal.
For the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024, international organisations from the social impact sector have an average FAIR SHARE Index of 19.92. This average, considerably higher than the index treshhold, reaffirms the gender representation gaps the FAIR SHARE Monitor has been highliting over the past years.
Our hope is that the findings below can be a starting point for organisational and sector-wide reflections to address gender gaps within the social impact sector and collectively work towards gender equity.
Data on 95 international organisations
Below is a ranking of all 95 organisations that were included in the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024. Together, their average FAIR SHARE Index is 19.92.
Organisations with a FAIR representation of women are highlighted in green and organisations who don’t are highlighted in red.
Symbols Key
✅ Active participation in Monitor
✳️ Committed organisation
⚠️ No data confirmation. Women staff estimated using women proportion from past Monitors or using 70% if organisation never submitted data to Monitor
⛔ Organisation has unsubscribed from Monitor mailing list.
↗ 10% decrease in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Progress)
↘ 10% increase in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Regress)
→ No significant change in FAIR SHARE since last monitored year
+ Organisation newly added to the Monitor
Organisation Size Key
- S: 1 – 100 employees
- M: 101 –1000 employees
- L: 1000+ employees
| Rank | Organisation name | Size | Women in staff | Women in leadership | Proportion of BIWOC in women leadership | FAIR SHARE Index 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sightsavers International ✅ | Medium | 51% | 50% | 45% | 0.53 ↗ |
| 2 | 350.org ✳️ ✅ | Small | 63% | 62% | 25% | 0.96 ↗ |
| 2 | WeMove Europe ✳️ ⚠️ | Small | 73% | 75% | N/A | 0.96 ↗ |
| 3 | ActionAid International ⚠️ | Large | 51% | 53% | 4% | 1.12 ↗ |
| 4 | Restless Development ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 49% | 51% | 46% | 1.17 ↗ |
| 5 | Partners in Health ✅ | Large | 50% | 50% | N/A | 1.60 ↗ |
| 6 | CIVICUS ✳️ ✅ | Small | 74% | 72% | 77% | 2.14 ↘ |
| 7 | VSO International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 54% | 58% | 50% | 2.36 ↗ |
| 8 | Terre des hommes International Federation ✅ | Small | 67% | 64% | N/A | 2.38 ↗ |
| 9 | Human Rights Watch ⚠️ | Medium | 62% | 60% | 25% | 2.44 ↗ |
| 10 | Girls Not Brides ✳️ ✅ | Small | 85% | 90% | 67% | 2.61 ↘ |
| 11 | Christian Aid ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 50% | 56% | 60% | 3.04 ↗ |
| 12 | Skateistan ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 46% | 48% | N/A | 4.30 ↗ |
| 13 | Children Rights International Network ✳️ ⚠️ | Small | 74% | 69% | N/A | 4.45 + |
| 14 | Internews ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 59% | 55% | N/A | 4.62 + |
| 15 | CARE International ✳️ ✅ | Large | 43% | 47% | N/A | 5.30 ↗ |
| 16 | Frontline Aids ✳️ ⚠️ | Small | 59% | 71% | 10% | 6.08 ↘ |
| 17 | European Environmental Bureau ✅ | Small | 63% | 56% | N/A | 6.61 ↗ |
| 18 | Hivos International ✅ | Medium | 61% | 75% | 33% | 6.88 ↘ |
| 19 | Plan International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 70% | 63% | N/A | 6.92 ↘ |
| 20 | Humanity United ✅ | Small | 69% | 62% | 50% | 7.21 + |
| 21 | Oxfam International ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 56% | 64% | 44% | 7.36 ↘ |
| 22 | The B Team ✳️ ✅ | Small | 81% | 73% | N/A | 7.92 ↗ |
| 23 | Mercy Corps ✳️ ✅ | Large | 41% | 50% | 48% | 8.59 ↗ |
| 24 | Greenpeace International ⚠️ | Large | 59% | 50% | N/A | 8.72 ↘ |
| 25 | Cuso International ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 61% | 36% | 8.89 + |
| 26 | HelpAge International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 50% | 68% | 47% | 9.09 ↘ |
| 27 | Fistula Foundation ⚠️ | Small | 56% | 75% | 33% | 9.38 + |
| 28 | Save the Children International ⚠️ | Large | 39% | 50% | N/A | 9.74 → |
| 29 | Heifer International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 60% | 33% | 10.0 ↗ |
| 29 | Pathfinder International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 60% | 56% | 10.0 ↗ |
| 30 | Population Council ✅ | Medium | 64% | 57% | 67% | 10.48 → |
| 31 | EngenderHealth ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 50% | 72% | 33% | 11 ↘ |
| 32 | Norwegian Refugee Council ✳️ ✅ | Large | 40% | 56% | N/A | 11.33 ↘ |
| 33 | AMREF Health Africa ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 39% | 47% | 75% | 11.37 ↗ |
| 34 | The Global Fund ✅ | Large | 60% | 49% | N/A | 11.43 + |
| 35 | Landesa ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 58% | 57% | 11.67 ↗ |
| 35 | Ashoka ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 58% | 38% | 11.67 ↗ |
| 36 | Well Grounded ✳️ ✅ | Small | 43% | 62% | 38% | 11.72 ↗ |
| 37 | Wikimedia Foundation ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 58% | N/A | 12.11 ↘ |
| 38 | Global Witness ✳️ ✅ | Small | 64% | 56% | 10% | 12.12 ↘ |
| 39 | The Nature Conservancy ⚠️ | Medium | 53% | 44% | 20% | 12.47 ↘ |
| 40 | Sierra Club ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 59% | 59% | 12.49 ↗ |
| 41 | Article 19 ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 69% | 58% | N/A | 12.51 ↘ |
| 42 | Danish Refugee Council ✅ | Large | 39% | 45% | N/A | 13.82 ↘ |
| 43 | World Resources Institute ✅ | Large | 57% | 45% | N/A | 15.17 ↘ |
| 44 | World Vision International ⚠️ | Large | 44% | 38% | N/A | 16.83 ↘ |
| 45 | One Acre Fund ✳️ ✅ | Large | 45% | 38% | 80% | 16.95 ↗ |
| 46 | United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR) ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 53% | 15% | 17.06 + |
| 47 | Global Giving ⚠️ | Medium | 80% | 65% | 46% | 17.78 + |
| 48 | Room to Read ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 54% | 7% | 17.82 ↘ |
| 49 | Habitat for Humanity International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 67% | 50% | 23% | 17.95 → |
| 50 | Caplor Horizons ✳️ ✅ | Small | 40% | 70% | 43% | 18.33 ↘ |
| 51 | International Child Development Initiatives ✳️ ✅ | Small | 90% | 71% | N/A | 18.57 ↘ |
| 52 | Direct Relief ✅ | Medium | 55% | 45% | 22% | 18.72 + |
| 53 | ChildFund International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 53% | 31% | 19.05 + |
| 54 | Search for Common Ground ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 52% | N/A | 19.21 ↗ |
| 55 | Pact ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 73% | 58% | 36% | 19.48 ↘ |
| 56 | WWF International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 51% | 35% | 19.51 ↗ |
| 57 | Americares ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 52% | 25% | 19.9 + |
| 58 | World Neighbors ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 52% | 9% | 20.0 + |
| 59 | BRAC International ✳️ ✅ | Large | 81% | 60% | N/A | 20.59 → |
| 60 | Amnesty International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 67% | 50% | 14% | 22.47 ↘ |
| 61 | Worldwide Initiatives for Grantmaker Support ⚠️ | Small | 61% | 43% | N/A | 22.56 + |
| 62 | Democracy Reporting International ✳️ ✅ | Small | 51% | 38% | N/A | 22.67 ↘ |
| 63 | Lutheran World Relief ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 48% | 50% | 23.11 + |
| 64 | The Hunger Project ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 50% | 50% | 23.33 → |
| 65 | International Committee of the Red Cross ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 48% | N/A | 24.23 ↗ |
| 66 | Global Fund for Community Foundations ✅ | Small | 80% | 56% | 40% | 24.44 + |
| 67 | MTV Staying Alive Foundation ✳️ ✅ | Small | 64% | 43% | 67% | 26.33 + |
| 68 | Church World Services ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 46% | N/A | 26.47 ↘ |
| 69 | Zakat Foundation of America ⚠️ | Small | 70% | 45% | 100% | 27.88 + |
| 70 | World Central Kitchen ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 52% | 9% | 29.52 + |
| 71 | Action on Disability and Development (ADD International) ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 44% | 57% | 29.58 + |
| 72 | Project HOPE ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 43% | 8% | 30.90 ↗ |
| 73 | Handicap International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 43% | N/A | 30.99 → |
| 74 | Anti-slavery International ✅ | Small | 73% | 45% | 40% | 34.19 + |
| 75 | ONE ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 41% | 67% | 34.58 → |
| 76 | International Rescue Committee ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 41% | N/A | 37.21 ↘ |
| 77 | The Taskforce for Global Health ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 39% | 43% | 37.52 + |
| 78 | SOS Children's Villages International ✅ | Large | 70% | 40% | N/A | 37.6 ↘ |
| 79 | HealthRight International ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 40% | 60% | 38.59 + |
| 79 | Reporters Without Borders ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 38% | N/A | 38.59 ↘ |
| 80 | Islamic Relief Worldwide ✅ | Medium | 34% | 21% | N/A | 38.73 → |
| 81 | Transparency International ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 62% | 33% | N/A | 39.44 ↘ |
| 82 | CBM Christoffel-Blindenmission Christian Blind Mission e.V. ⚠️ | Medium | 54% | 26% | N/A | 43.22 ↗ |
| 83 | Conservation International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 32% | 0% | 46.63 ↘ |
| 84 | MAP International ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 33% | 10% | 46.77 + |
| 85 | Compassion International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 31% | 9% | 48.42 + |
| 86 | Catholic Relief Services ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 31% | 9% | 49.53 ↗ |
| 87 | Action Against Hunger International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 35% | 11% | 49.92 → |
| 88 | ACTED ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 29% | N/A | 54.57 ↘ |
| 89 | ADRA International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 54% | 16% | 11% | 62.77 → |
| 90 | Brother's Brother Foundation ⚠️ | Small | 70% | 23% | 29% | 65.01 + |
| 91 | AmfAR (Foundation for AIDS Research) ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 13% | 33% | 82.5 ↘ |
Small organisations ranking
Below is a ranking of 22 small organisations that were included in the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024. Together, their average FAIR SHARE Index is 15.21.
Organisations with a FAIR representation of women are highlighted in green and organisations who don’t are highlighted in red.
Symbols Key
✅ Active participation in Monitor
✳️ Committed organisation
⚠️ No data confirmation. Women staff estimated using women proportion from past Monitors or using 70% if organisation never submitted data to Monitor
⛔ Organisation has unsubscribed from Monitor mailing list.
↗ 10% decrease in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Progress)
↘ 10% increase in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Regress)
→ No significant change in FAIR SHARE since last monitored year
+ Organisation newly added to the Monitor
Organisation Size Key
- S: 1 – 100 employees
- M: 101 –1000 employees
- L: 1000+ employees
| Rank | Organisation | Size | Women in staff | Women in leadership | Proportion of BIWOC in women leadership | FAIR SHARE Index 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 350.org ✳️ ✅ | Small | 63% | 62% | 25% | 0.96 ↗ |
| 1 | WeMove Europe ✳️ ⚠️ | Small | 73% | 75% | N/A | 0.96 ↗ |
| 2 | CIVICUS ✳️ ✅ | Small | 74% | 72% | 77% | 2.14 ↘ |
| 3 | Terre des hommes International Federation ✅ | Small | 67% | 64% | N/A | 2.38 ↗ |
| 4 | Girls Not Brides ✳️ ✅ | Small | 85% | 90% | 67% | 2.61 ↘ |
| 5 | Children Rights International Network ✳️ ⚠️ | Small | 74% | 69% | N/A | 4.45 + |
| 6 | Frontline Aids ✳️ ⚠️ | Small | 59% | 71% | 10% | 6.08 ↘ |
| 7 | European Environmental Bureau ✅ | Small | 63% | 56% | N/A | 6.61 ↗ |
| 8 | Humanity United ✅ | Small | 69% | 62% | 50% | 7.21 + |
| 9 | The B Team ✳️ ✅ | Small | 81% | 73% | N/A | 7.92 ↗ |
| 10 | Fistula Foundation ⚠️ | Small | 56% | 75% | 33% | 9.38 + |
| 11 | Well Grounded ✳️ ✅ | Small | 43% | 62% | 38% | 11.72 ↗ |
| 12 | Global Witness ✳️ ✅ | Small | 64% | 56% | 10% | 12.12 ↘ |
| 13 | Caplor Horizons ✳️ ✅ | Small | 40% | 70% | 43% | 18.33 ↘ |
| 14 | International Child Development Initiatives ✳️ ✅ | Small | 90% | 71% | N/A | 18.57 ↘ |
| 15 | Worldwide Initiatives for Grantmaker Support ⚠️ | Small | 61% | 43% | N/A | 22.56 + |
| 16 | Democracy Reporting International ✳️ ✅ | Small | 51% | 38% | N/A | 22.67 ↘ |
| 17 | Global Fund for Community Foundations ✅ | Small | 80% | 56% | 40% | 24.44 + |
| 18 | MTV Staying Alive Foundation ✳️ ✅ | Small | 64% | 43% | 67% | 26.33 + |
| 19 | Zakat Foundation of America ⚠️ | Small | 70% | 45% | 100% | 27.88 + |
| 20 | Anti-slavery International ✅ | Small | 73% | 45% | 40% | 34.19 + |
| 21 | Brother's Brother Foundation ⚠️ | Small | 70% | 23% | 29% | 65.01 + |
Medium organisations ranking
Below is a ranking of 43 medium-sized organisations that were included in the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024. Together, their average FAIR SHARE Index is 21.01.
Organisations with a FAIR representation of women are highlighted in green and organisations who don’t are highlighted in red.
Symbols Key
✅ Active participation in Monitor
✳️ Committed organisation
⚠️ No data confirmation. Women staff estimated using women proportion from past Monitors or using 70% if organisation never submitted data to Monitor
⛔ Organisation has unsubscribed from Monitor mailing list.
↗ 10% decrease in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Progress)
↘ 10% increase in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Regress)
→ No significant change in FAIR SHARE since last monitored year
+ Organisation newly added to the Monitor
Organisation Size Key
- S: 1 – 100 employees
- M: 101 –1000 employees
- L: 1000+ employees
| Rank | Organisation | Size | Women in staff | Women in leadership | Proportion of BIWOC in women leadership | FAIR SHARE Index 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sightsavers International ✅ | Medium | 51% | 50% | 45% | 0.53 ↗ |
| 2 | Restless Development ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 49% | 51% | 46% | 1.17 ↗ |
| 3 | VSO International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 54% | 58% | 50% | 2.36 ↗ |
| 4 | Human Rights Watch ⚠️ | Medium | 62% | 60% | 25% | 2.44 ↗ |
| 5 | Christian Aid ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 50% | 56% | 60% | 3.04 ↗ |
| 6 | Skateistan ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 46% | 48% | N/A | 4.30 ↗ |
| 7 | Internews ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 59% | 55% | N/A | 4.62 + |
| 8 | Hivos International ✅ | Medium | 61% | 75% | 33% | 6.88 ↘ |
| 9 | Plan International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 70% | 63% | N/A | 6.92 ↘ |
| 10 | Oxfam International ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 56% | 64% | 44% | 7.36 ↘ |
| 11 | Cuso International ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 61% | 36% | 8.89 + |
| 12 | HelpAge International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 50% | 68% | 47% | 9.09 ↘ |
| 13 | Population Council ✅ | Medium | 64% | 57% | 67% | 10.48 → |
| 14 | EngenderHealth ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 50% | 72% | 33% | 11.0 ↘ |
| 15 | AMREF Health Africa ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 39% | 47% | 75% | 11,37 ↗ |
| 16 | Landesa ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 58% | 57% | 11.67 ↗ |
| 16 | Ashoka ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 58% | 38% | 11.67 ↗ |
| 17 | Wikimedia Foundation ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 58% | N/A | 12.11 ↘ |
| 18 | The Nature Conservancy ⚠️ | Medium | 53% | 44% | 20% | 12.47 ↘ |
| 19 | Article 19 ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 69% | 58% | N/A | 12.51 ↘ |
| 20 | United Methodist Committee on Relief (UMCOR) ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 53% | 15% | 17.06 + |
| 21 | Global Giving ⚠️ | Medium | 80% | 65% | 46% | 17.78 + |
| 22 | Habitat for Humanity International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 67% | 50% | 23% | 17.95 → |
| 23 | Direct Relief ✅ | Medium | 55% | 45% | 22% | 18.72 + |
| 24 | Pact ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 73% | 58% | 36% | 19.48 ↘ |
| 25 | Americares ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 52% | 25% | 19.9 + |
| 26 | World Neighbors ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 52% | 9% | 20.0 + |
| 27 | Amnesty International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 67% | 50% | 14% | 22.47 ↘ |
| 28 | Lutheran World Relief ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 48% | 50% | 23.11 + |
| 29 | The Hunger Project ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 50% | 50% | 23.33 → |
| 30 | World Central Kitchen ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 52% | 9% | 29.52 + |
| 31 | Action on Disability and Development (ADD International) ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 44% | 57% | 29.58 + |
| 32 | Project HOPE ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 43% | 8% | 30.90 ↗ |
| 33 | ONE ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 41% | 67% | 34.58 → |
| 34 | The Taskforce for Global Health ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 39% | 43% | 37.52 + |
| 35 | HealthRight International ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 40% | 60% | 38.59 + |
| 35 | Reporters Without Borders ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 38% | N/A | 38.59 ↘ |
| 36 | Islamic Relief Worldwide ✅ | Medium | 34% | 21% | N/A | 38.73 → |
| 37 | Transparency International ✳️ ⚠️ | Medium | 62% | 33% | N/A | 39.44 ↘ |
| 38 | CBM Christoffel-Blindenmission Christian Blind Mission e.V. ⚠️ | Medium | 54% | 26% | N/A | 43.22 ↗ |
| 39 | MAP International ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 33% | 10% | 46.77 + |
| 40 | ADRA International ✳️ ✅ | Medium | 54% | 16% | 11% | 62.77 → |
| 41 | AmfAR (Foundation for AIDS Research) ⚠️ | Medium | 70% | 13% | 33% | 82.5 ↘ |
Large organisations ranking
Below is a ranking of 30 large organisations that were included in the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024. Together, their average FAIR SHARE Index is 21.83.
Organisations with a FAIR representation of women are highlighted in green and organisations who don’t are highlighted in red.
Symbols Key
✅ Active participation in Monitor
✳️ Committed organisation
⚠️ No data confirmation. Women staff estimated using women proportion from past Monitors or using 70% if organisation never submitted data to Monitor
⛔ Organisation has unsubscribed from Monitor mailing list.
↗ 10% decrease in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Progress)
↘ 10% increase in Fair Share Index since last monitored year (Regress)
→ No significant change in FAIR SHARE since last monitored year
+ Organisation newly added to the Monitor
Organisation Size Key
- S: 1 – 100 employees
- M: 101 –1000 employees
- L: 1000+ employees
| Rank | Organisation name | Size | Women in staff | Women in leadership | Proportion of BIWOC in women leadership | FAIR SHARE Index 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ActionAid International ⚠️ | Large | 51% | 53% | 4% | 1.12 ↗ |
| 2 | Partners in Health ✅ | Large | 50% | 50% | N/A | 1.60 ↗ |
| 3 | CARE International ✳️ ✅ | Large | 43% | 47% | N/A | 5.30 ↗ |
| 4 | Mercy Corps ✳️ ✅ | Large | 41% | 50% | 48% | 8.59 ↗ |
| 5 | Greenpeace International ⚠️ | Large | 59% | 50% | N/A | 8.72 ↘ |
| 6 | Save the Children International ⚠️ | Large | 39% | 50% | N/A | 9.74 → |
| 7 | Heifer International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 60% | 33% | 10.0 ↗ |
| 7 | Pathfinder International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 60% | 56% | 10.0 ↗ |
| 8 | Norwegian Refugee Council ✳️ ✅ | Large | 40% | 56% | N/A | 11.33 ↘ |
| 9 | The Global Fund ✅ | Large | 60% | 49% | N/A | 11.43 + |
| 10 | Sierra Club ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 59% | 59% | 12.49 ↗ |
| 11 | Danish Refugee Council ✅ | Large | 39% | 45% | N/A | 13.82 ↘ |
| 12 | World Resources Institute ✅ | Large | 57% | 45% | N/A | 15.17 ↘ |
| 13 | World Vision International ⚠️ | Large | 44% | 38% | N/A | 16.83 ↘ |
| 14 | One Acre Fund ✳️ ✅ | Large | 45% | 38% | 80% | 16.95 ↗ |
| 15 | Room to Read ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 54% | 7% | 17.82 ↘ |
| 16 | ChildFund International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 53% | 31% | 19.05 + |
| 17 | Search for Common Ground ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 52% | N/A | 19.21 ↗ |
| 18 | WWF International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 51% | 35% | 19.51 ↗ |
| 19 | BRAC International ✳️ ✅ | Large | 81% | 60% | N/A | 20.59 → |
| 20 | International Committee of the Red Cross ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 48% | N/A | 24.23 ↗ |
| 21 | Church World Services ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 46% | N/A | 26.47 ↘ |
| 22 | Handicap International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 43% | N/A | 30.99 → |
| 23 | International Rescue Committee ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 41% | N/A | 37.21 ↘ |
| 24 | SOS Children's Villages International ✅ | Large | 70% | 40% | N/A | 37.6 ↘ |
| 25 | Conservation International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 32% | 0% | 46.63 ↘ |
| 26 | Compassion International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 31% | 9% | 48.42 + |
| 27 | Catholic Relief Services ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 31% | 9% | 49.53 ↗ |
| 28 | Action Against Hunger International ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 35% | 11% | 49.92 → |
| 29 | ACTED ⚠️ | Large | 70% | 29% | N/A | 54.57 ↘ |
Insights from 5 years of monitoring
5 years in: What we have learned over the years
As we celebrate five years of tracking and advocating for gender equitable leadership in the international social impact sector, we also want to share observations and lessons we have learned along the way.
Still a long way to go towards full transparency
Over the years, we have observed a growing number of organisations acknowledging the necessity for gender transparency when it comes to leadership. The growing number of organisations participating in the FAIR SHARE Monitor each year reaffirms this observation. However, with an active participation rate below 50% since 2021, we are also faced with the reality that too many organisations are missing from the Monitor for us to truly measure the extent (and consequences) of women’s underrepresentation in the social impact sector.
Growing interest and commitment to achieve gender equity
When we set up the FAIR SHARE Commitment, we could not have imagined that so many international organisations would not only be open to submitting their data for the FAIR SHARE Monitor each year, but also be eager to engage with fellow organisations from the sector around issues of diversity, inclusion and equity. While the proportion of committed organisations is still low relative to the total number of organisations monitored since 2019 (35%), the increasing number of organisations reaching out to us to express their desire to join the FAIR SHARE Commitment community is encouraging. The engagement in peer learning spaces also testify to committed organisations’ motivation to reflect and exchange on various ways and mechanisms to improve their internal structures for better representation.
Organisation size shouldn’t be a barrier to gender equity
Twice now, we have clustered organisations according to their staff size. Twice now, we have found that organisation size alone cannot be to blame for women’s underrepresentation in leadership. In fact, for the Monitors 2023 and 2024, organisations of all sizes (including the very large ones) have stood out by being among the top-ranking organisations. Of course, more data on this matter is still needed to better understand how staff size influences women’s representation in leadership and what organisations are doing well to make gender equity a reality.
Bridging racial representation gaps shouldn’t be optional
Our findings from monitoring the representation of Black, Brown, Indigenous women and women of colour (BIWOC) are unequivocal: whatever progress we, as a sector, make in terms of women’s representation in leadership will be meaningless if this progress only includes a fraction of women who contribute to the sector. Since 2021, only a fraction of organisations has been able to provide data on BIWOC to be included in the FAIR SHARE Monitor. In the Monitor 2024, women of colour still only hold a small fraction of all available women leadership positions among those organisations. Without intentional approaches to improve both data collection on BIWOC employees and their representation in leadership, the sector will still fall short of walking the talk of gender equity.
5 years of monitoring: Data from 30-core organisations
Over the last five years, the FAIR SHARE Monitor has tracked women’s leadership in a total of 102 unique international organisations from various parts of the world. Throughout, 30 organisations have consistently been monitored since we started our work in 2019. An analysis of this core sample of 30 organisations has enabled us to draw an important conclusion on the state of gender equity in the international social impact sector: while there has been some progress over the years, there is still a noticeable gap between the proportion of women on staff the proportion of women in leadership.
Over the years the average percentage of women on staff has varied between 58% and 59% while the average percentage of women in leadership has improved from 50% in 2021 to a stable 52% for the last three years. This timid but consistent progress is reflected in the positive evolution of the average FAIR SHARE Index which has improved from 20.7 in the Monitor 2020 to 15.5 in the Monitor 2024.
With this evolution, the Monitor 2024 could be described as the most equitable for women in these 30 organisations, while the Monitor 2020 could be qualified as the least equitable. During this most equitable year, 57% of organisations had women CEOs/Executive Directors, and 53% of boards were chaired by women.
Over the years, data on Black, Brown, Indigenous women and women has been consistently available in over half of core monitor organisations, varying between 50% and 70% since 2021 when we started collecting this data. When looking into BIWOC leadership specifically, we observe consistent progress, with an average of 38% of women leadership positions being held by BIWOC in the monitor 2021, and that number rising to 45% in the Monitor 2023. In the Monitor 2024 however, we observe a significant dip in BIWOC leadership with an average of 41% of BIWOC leadership among women leaders.
FAIR SHARE Index of 30 organisations over 5 years
Below is an overview of 30 core organisations that have been included in the Monitor over the last 5 years, including their individual FAIR SHARE Index for each Monitor.
Organisations that have signed the FAIR SHARE Commitment are marked with ✳️.
Organisation Size Key
- S: 1 – 100 employees
- M: 101 –1000 employees
- L: 1000+ employees
| Organisation | Size | FAIR SHARE Index 2024 | FAIR SHARE Index 2023 | FAIR SHARE Index 2022 | FAIR SHARE Index 2021 | FAIR SHARE Index 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sightsavers International | Medium | 0.53 | 2.64 | 2.00 | 8.00 | 9.60 |
| 350.org ✳️ | Small | 0.96 | 2.35 | 1.10 | 0.70 | 1.00 |
| WeMove Europe ✳️ | Small | 0.96 | 6.43 | 5.40 | 1.80 | 11.80 |
| ActionAid International | Large | 1.12 | 36.66 | 36.67 | 11.70 | 20.00 |
| Restless Development ✳️ | Medium | 1.17 | 6.98 | 10.10 | 10.20 | 16.80 |
| CIVICUS ✳️ | Small | 2.14 | 0.24 | 2.38 | 0.40 | 11.00 |
| VSO International ✳️ | Medium | 2.36 | 17.41 | 13.30 | 10.10 | 13.90 |
| Terre des hommes International Federation | Small | 2.38 | 25.00 | 0.00 | 36.70 | 27.80 |
| Human Rights Watch | Medium | 2.44 | 19.77 | 19.77 | 19.10 | 9.80 |
| Skateistan ✳️ | Medium | 4.30 | 5.95 | 2.29 | 0.30 | 7.60 |
| CARE International ✳️ | Large | 5.30 | 6.57 | 8.65 | 10.60 | 13.40 |
| Frontline Aids ✳️ | Small | 6.08 | 5.37 | 5.00 | 1.80 | 13.00 |
| Oxfam International ✳️ | Medium | 7.36 | 4.03 | 9.70 | 9.70 | 13.20 |
| Greenpeace International | Large | 8.72 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 11.30 | 11.30 |
| HelpAge International ✳️ | Medium | 9.09 | 0.91 | 8.59 | 8.60 | 13.40 |
| Save the Children International | Large | 9.74 | 10.68 | 28.71 | 11.60 | 16.10 |
| EngenderHealth ✳️ | Medium | 11.00 | 8.46 | 6.96 | 14.50 | 21.00 |
| AMREF Health Africa ✳️ | Medium | 11.37 | 12.84 | 11.00 | 7.70 | 25.00 |
| World Vision International | Large | 16.83 | 9.11 | 9.11 | 9.10 | 10.30 |
| Habitat for Humanity International ✳️ | Medium | 17.95 | 18.35 | 22.42 | 24.70 | 25.40 |
| Pact ✳️ | Medium | 19.48 | 5.03 | 4.40 | 9.00 | 15.60 |
| BRAC International ✳️ | Large | 20.59 | 21.32 | 9.90 | 19.70 | 18.20 |
| Amnesty International ✳️ | Medium | 22.47 | 9.65 | 35.62 | 35.60 | 22.50 |
| International Committee of the Red Cross | Large | 24.23 | 46.91 | 46.91 | 38.30 | 18.00 |
| ONE ✳️ | Medium | 34.58 | 35.88 | 31.19 | 32.90 | 35.40 |
| SOS Children's Villages International | Large | 37.60 | 29.03 | 38.59 | 25.00 | 22.30 |
| Islamic Relief Worldwide | Medium | 38.73 | 39.39 | 39.39 | 64.00 | 87.60 |
| Transparency International ✳️ | Medium | 39.44 | 32.50 | 13.90 | 18.20 | 10.20 |
| CBM Christoffel-Blindenmission Christian Blind Mission e.V. | Medium | 43.22 | 50.91 | 31.89 | 33.70 | 56.60 |
| ADRA International ✳️ | Medium | 62.77 | 67.43 | 59.36 | 46.80 | 43.10 |
5-Year FAIR SHARE Streak
In the last five years, 10 organisations in particular have had a consistent fair representation of women in their leadership, with an annual FAIR SHARE Index consistently below 15 each year.
We command these organisations for their continuous dedication to equitable gender representation and hope that more organisations will join them as the sector progressively recognises the imperative to collectively work towards intersectional gender equity.
Organisation Size FAIR SHARE Index 2024 FAIR SHARE Index 2023 FAIR SHARE Index 2022 FAIR SHARE Index 2021 FAIR SHARE Index 2020
Sightsavers International Medium 0.53 2.64 2.00 8.00 9.60
350.org ✳️ Small 0.96 2.35 1.10 0.70 1.00
WeMove Europe ✳️ Small 0.96 6.43 5.40 1.80 11.80
CIVICUS ✳️ Small 2.14 0.24 2.38 0.40 11.00
Skateistan ✳️ Medium 4.30 5.95 2.29 0.30 7.60
CARE International ✳️ Large 5.30 6.57 8.65 10.60 13.40
Frontline Aids ✳️ Small 6.08 5.37 5.00 1.80 13.00
Oxfam International ✳️ Medium 7.36 4.03 9.70 9.70 13.20
Greenpeace International Large 8.72 0.78 0.78 11.30 11.30
HelpAge International ✳️ Medium 9.09 0.91 8.59 8.60 13.40
Your feedback is important to us!
Did you find the FAIR SHARE Monitor 2024 insightful? Any concerns or suggestions you would like to share with us? Send your feedback in the contact form below or email us directly: monitor@fairsharewl.org. We look forward to hearing from you!
