Opinion: Oregon’s social safety net is entering a dangerous squeeze

Scott Kerman
For The Oregonian/OregonLiveKerman was executive director of Blanchet House from August 2019 to December 2025 and has 20 years of nonprofit experience.
Across Oregon, the nonprofits that provide essential education, health, employment and human services have entered a period of intense pressure. Federal funding for core programs is shrinking or uncertain. Local governments are struggling to sustain existing commitments. At the same time, housing costs remain high, job markets are uneven and more Oregonians are turning to nonprofit providers for help.
The gap between need and capacity is widening.
Gov. Tina Kotek and other state leaders are working to reverse decades of underinvestment in housing, mental health and essential human services. Those efforts are necessary and long overdue. But even as Oregon increases its commitment, the broader funding environment remains volatile. Nonprofit organizations delivering these services are being asked to do more with systems that were never built for this level of strain.
For many social service nonprofits, especially small and mid-sized organizations providing education, health care access, workforce development, housing, food security and family support, this moment is forcing painful choices: shrinking services, laying off staff or closing altogether. Dozens of nonprofits in Oregon have already cut programs and staff and anticipate further reductions, according to a recent survey by the Coalition of Communities of Color and Nonprofit Association of Oregon. When that happens, need doesn’t disappear. It concentrates. Remaining organizations absorb more people, more complexity and more risk, often without the resources or infrastructure to do so safely.
This dynamic is especially acute in rural communities, where services are already thin and alternatives are limited. And what begins as a rural funding challenge quickly becomes a statewide systems issue.
The problem is not simply about dollars. It is structural.
Most nonprofits were designed to deliver services, not to independently maintain the administrative, compliance and technology infrastructure now required of them. Payroll, human resources, finance, information technology, cybersecurity and reporting are often handled by a small number of staff or absorbed by executive directors already stretched thin.
As funding tightens and scrutiny increases, this model becomes fragile. Burnout rises. Compliance risk grows. Leadership turnover accelerates. And when one organization stumbles, the impact ripples across the broader care ecosystem.
There is a practical way to reduce that risk: invest in shared-services consortiums for social service nonprofits.
Under this model, peer organizations jointly govern a separate nonprofit entity that provides professional administrative infrastructure – the human resources, finance, data systems and other business functions mentioned above. Each organization keeps its board, mission, programs, culture and fundraising. What they share is the backbone that keeps operations stable. And what they avoid is outsourcing essential needs – a practice that perpetuates a fractured, disconnected experience for clients and staff.
I’m not proposing a merger or consolidation. Rather, the idea is to strengthen the delivery system that public and philanthropic investments rely on. It is collective resilience, fostering the unified ecosystems clients and staff need to succeed.
A proven model already exists. The Claremont Colleges in California, seven independent institutions, share centralized services and provide mutual benefits through a jointly governed entity while preserving their distinct identities. The result is lower costs, stronger systems and greater resilience. Oregon’s social service sector can do the same.
Shared infrastructure lowers costs while deepening staff and client supports, reduces the harm organizations experience when people in key administrative services positions leave, and improves accountability, making state and local investments more effective and durable. It allows nonprofits to coordinate referrals among one another, reducing service gaps for clients and communities. For funders and public agencies, consortiums offer accountability, scale and continuity in a rapidly shifting landscape.
This kind of collaboration requires leadership and upfront investment. Foundations, policymakers, and public agencies must prioritize funding for shared infrastructure – not just programs – and recognize that coordination is now a necessity, not a nice-to-have.
If Oregon wants its renewed investments in housing and behavioral health to succeed, the nonprofit delivery system must be strong enough to carry them. Shared-services consortiums offer a realistic, near-term strategy to stabilize the sector so that essential care, opportunity and support can endure – even as conditions grow more challenging.