- The Mastercard Foundation is locked in a $4.6 million legal dispute with 54 Collective.
- Founders Factory Africa was a regional outpost of the U.K.-based Founders Factory
- The pan-African organization rebranded as 54 Collective
What began as one of Africas most ambitious startup funding partnerships has unraveled into a courtroom fight over missing audits, backdated transactions, and allegations of misappropriated charitable funds.
The Mastercard Foundation, one of Africas largest philanthropic investors, is locked in a $4.6 million legal dispute with 54 Collective, a venture builder formerly known as Founders Factory Africa. At stake is not just moneybut the credibility of impact capital on the continent.
An Ambitious Partnership Built to Scale African Startups
In 2018, Johannesburg-based Africa Founders Ventures (AFV) launched as Founders Factory Africa, a regional outpost of the U.K.-based Founders Factory. Its mission: support early-stage African startups through venture building, seed capital, and technical support. By 2021, it had attracted marquee backers such as Standard Bank, Netcare, and Johnson & Johnson.
But the real windfall came in 2022, when the Mastercard Foundation signed on as lead funder, committing more than $106 million over several years. By late 2023, the partnership had created more than 17,500 jobs and supported over 40 startups across 10+ countries.
In a bold move to assert a pan-African identity, the organization rebranded as 54 Collective, a nod to the continents 54 countries. That rebrand, however, would ignite a chain reaction that exposed deep governance flawsand ultimately brought the house down.
The Rebrand That Sparked the Breakdown
According to court documents, in August 2024, Mastercards legal team raised concerns that the 54 Collective rebrand had been executed without approval and may have used restricted grant fundscharitable money intended for nonprofit purposesto build a brand that also served affiliated for-profit entities like Founders Factory Africa (FFA) and Utopia Capital.
An estimated $689,931 had been spent on the rebrandpaid for from the same grant pool designed to support entrepreneurs across Africa.
The Foundation demanded repayment. At first, AFVs leadership appeared to comply. But within days, it reversed course, arguing repayment could constitute reckless trading under South African law, and began pushing back against Mastercards narrative.
The Mastercard Foundations grant was not terminated due to breach, said Bongani Sithole, CEO of 54 Collective, in a July statement. Our programs were effective, and the decision to rebrand was aligned with our broader mission.
The Audit That Changed Everything
In response to the rebrand dispute, Mastercard commissioned Deloitte to conduct a forensic review of AFVs financials. With read-only access to its Xero accounting system, auditors uncovered troubling patterns:
- Over 2,000 backdated journal entries logged just before the audit
- No audited financial statements for FY2023 or FY2024, despite millions in disbursed grants
- A $4.59 million transfer from AFV (the nonprofit grant recipient) to FFA (its for-profit affiliate), without adequate justification or approval
Mastercard Foundation halted all funding in January 2025, citing governance breakdowns and misuse of restricted funds. The funding freeze left the organization in free fall.
Collapse and Courtroom Battles
By February 2025, 54 Collective began shutting down operations. More than 40 employees across Nairobi, Lagos, and Johannesburg were laid off. Programs like the Gen F accelerator and the Entrepreneur Academywhich had become a lifeline for African early-stage startupswere discontinued.
In March, AFV filed for business rescue, a South African legal protection similar to Chapter 11 bankruptcy. But Mastercard argued the filing was a stalling tactic to protect assets, not a genuine effort to restructure.
South African courts agreed.
In a ruling issued July 22, Justice Johann Gautschi described the rescue plan as a blatant disregard for the law. He ordered the provisional liquidation of AFV and froze its accounts at Standard Bank, Investec, and Nedbank.
There was no real prospect of rescue, wrote Gautschi. This was an attempt to frustrate creditors and the court process.
A final liquidation hearing is set for August 11.
A Costly Void in the Startup Ecosystem
The fallout from 54 Collectives collapse has rippled across the African startup ecosystem. While the $40 million VC fund it launched, UAF1, continues to operate under separate governance, many founders lost access to mentorship, grants, and operational support they had counted on.
This isnt just a funding issueits an ecosystem loss, said Nomfundo Mbele, an innovation policy analyst in Cape Town. 54 Collective filled a gap that few others had the infrastructure or risk appetite to tackle.
Some startups are now scrambling to find new partners. Others face survival threats.
At the same time, the scandal has ignited debate over how philanthropic capital is managedparticularly in hybrid structures that mix nonprofit missions with for-profit ambitions.
The Governance Challenge of Blended Finance
The 54 Collective model was built on a dual-track strategy: a nonprofit arm (AFV) receiving grants, and a for-profit entity (FFA) executing commercial investments. On paper, it was a promising approach to balancing impact and scalability.
But the overlapping boards, shared branding, and fluid movement of funds between the two created compliance vulnerabilities. Deloittes audit found that 54 Collective often failed to distinguish between the nonprofit and for-profit operations in practice, despite legal and accounting obligations to do so.
Legal experts say its a cautionary tale.
This case highlights a fundamental risk in blended finance, said Tendai Mwangi, a Nairobi-based corporate attorney. Without airtight firewalls and transparent governance, even well-intentioned structures can collapse under scrutiny.
Mastercard Foundation Responds
For its part, the Mastercard Foundation has filed for arbitration in Ontario, Canada, seeking to recover funds and clarify the limits of responsibility in grant-financed ventures. While the Foundation has not publicly accused AFV of fraud, its filings assert that charitable funds were used in ways that violated the terms of their agreement.
In an emailed statement, the Foundation emphasized that its mission to support African youth and entrepreneurs remains unchanged, and that it is reviewing its grant monitoring systems.
What Comes Next
As the final liquidation hearing approaches, more details may emerge about how one of the most well-funded startup accelerators on the continent unraveled in less than a year.
Whats clear already is that trust has been shakenbetween donors and grantees, between nonprofits and their affiliates, and across an ecosystem that often runs on optimism and lean oversight.
Africa needs more bold capital, said Mbele. But bold doesnt mean blind.
