No one sets out to rebuild poorly. And yet, that’s exactly where we may be headed. 

As we approach the 18-month mark since Oct. 7, 2023, we observe a fragmented recovery landscape in Israel. Some communities — families of hostages, those displaced from their homes — remain in crisis-response mode. Others are returning and beginning to plan for recovery, while many are settling into a “new normal” that is anything but normal. 

Photocreo Bednarek/Adobe Stock

Through our work across Israel’s social impact sector, global crisis recovery and philanthropy, we’ve witnessed both inspiring innovation and a troubling return to pre-crisis patterns. The gravitational pull toward the familiar grows stronger by the day, threatening to close the narrow window for meaningful transformation. 

In our previous op-ed for eJewishPhilanthropy (“Beyond the ‘rebuilding better’ slogan: Israel’s window for transformative change is closing,” Oct. 15, 2024) we wrote about that window: the liminal space that emerges when things break. In that space, old norms are temporarily suspended and change becomes possible. We also warned that the window is closing — and that missing this opportunity would be a loss not only for Israel but for the broader region. 

That warning still holds. But this time, we offer a path forward. 

Our new report, “Rebuilding Better: Beyond the Slogan,” is both a provocation and a guide — calling on everyone involved in recovery to think more ambitiously about what “better” really requires, and offering practical tools to make it real. 

Building better is hard — much harder than simply going back to what’s known. It requires courage, intentionality, reflection, rigorous thinking and sensitivity. Some people aren’t yet ready to think about rebuilding — especially those still deep in crisis. Others may resist rebuilding differently. 

But for those who are ready to act and want to inspire others to do the same, this is where to begin: 

First, reflect on the opportunities to rebuild better within your organization. Where in your current activities are you still in crisis mode or slipping back to what was? This will look different for every organization, but there are common questions worth reflecting on — questions such as: What emergency-era practices that are ill-suited for sustainable recovery are we holding onto? Which programs might be unintentionally recreating the very vulnerabilities we hope to fix? 

Second, identify levers for transformative change. The fluid post-disaster space allows for radical changes to occur, things that simply couldn’t happen before. Radical improvements can happen in any dimension of the organization. Three repeatedly underutilized levers we encourage leaders to consider: 

1. Technology. Crises create a liminal space for tech innovation. Urgency lowers resistance to adoption, allowing truly needed solutions to be embraced almost overnight (e.g., remote work during COVID). New challenges rally fresh talent and fuel creativity, accelerating solutions in weeks rather than years. This creates a rare window of opportunity for impact-driven tech to address both immediate and preexisting challenges (e.g., mental health and rehabilitation tech). Technology isn’t always the answer, but when thoughtfully deployed with deep contextual understanding, it can dramatically amplify rebuilding efforts. 
2. Cross-sector partnerships. In the immediate aftermath of a disaster, partnerships emerge with surprising ease. Bureaucratic hurdles shrink, sectors align around urgent needs and collaboration flows naturally. But as the crisis stabilizes, old habits creep back — organizations retreat into their silos, competing priorities take over and partnerships that once felt essential start to weaken. 
3. Innovative financial models. Crises expose what’s always been true: there’s never enough money to meet every need. But in a crisis, the stakes are higher — and so is the pressure to make every dollar go further. That’s where catalytic capital, blended finance and results-based funding come in. These models help stretch resources, unlock new ones and align incentives for long-term impact. The greater opportunity is to bring these tools from the margins into the mainstream through often overlooked mechanisms like Program Related Investments (PRI) and Mission Related Investments (MRI) and in layers of financial capital structures. 

Finally: translate insights into strategy and operations. Commitment to rebuilding better must translate into intentional choices. Change is never easy — and even harder in a post-disaster setting. In our report, we shared a proposed framework that can help think through these choices and trade-offs. 

Rebuilding better is already underway 

Startups and small nonprofits are leading with innovation on the ground. Policy work in this space is more than robust. Few projects are already proving the huge potential of this moment for Israel and also for the global recovery sector. If we’re serious about transformation, this mindset must spread across organizations of all sectors and sizes. It has to move beyond pilots and papers and into the core operations of institutions everywhere. 

This is what led us to develop “Rebuilding Better: Beyond the Slogan.” What began as an internal effort to clarify PollyLabs’ approach and support our partners has grown into a shared resource. It’s not a blueprint but a perspective, a provocation and a guide. We’re offering it to help catalyze the strategic conversations and collective decisions this moment demands. 

Alina Shkolnikov Shvartsman is the chief partnerships officer at PollyLabs and an adjunct professor at The New School in New York City. She specializes in impact innovation and catalytic capital. 

Bar Pereg is the founder and CEO at PollyLabs, a board member at Neta and an early-stage tech investor and advisor. 

Ella Drory is the research and incubation lead at PollyLabs. She is an expert in social impact tech and venture building, nonprofit strategy and growth.