This study draws on framing theory to investigate how microfinance institutions (MFIs) strategically construct a vulnerability-oriented organisational identity and how this framing influences their funding decisions during the pre-campaign phase of prosocial crowdfunding. Using a unique dataset of 334,852 microloans issued by 140 MFIs across 59 countries on the Kiva platform, we distinguish between MFIs exclusively listed on Kiva and those also featured on Mix Market. Our findings reveal a pronounced funding bias among MFIs that do not emphasise vulnerability in their framing. In contrast, MFIs that adopt a prognostic vulnerability frame tend to reverse this bias—particularly those solely reliant on Kiva. While both types of MFIs demonstrate some capacity to mitigate funding inequality, the effect is significantly more pronounced among those exclusively listed on Kiva. Our results also point to a potential mission drift, possibly incentivised by Kiva's vulnerability badge system, which may reward financial stability over genuine outreach to vulnerable borrowers. Overall, the findings underscore the central role of institutional framing in shaping MFIs' funding strategies and access to capital for marginalised entrepreneurs in the pre-campaign phase.

This research was financed by Portuguese public funds through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., under the projects PTDC/EGEOGE/31246/2017, UID/4105/2025, UID/315/2025, and UIDB/05037/2025 (DOI: 10.54499/UIDB/05037/2025).

Crowdfunding,Framing theory,Microfinance institutions,Prosocial finance,Vulnerability framing

• Economics and Business - Social Sciences