The United Nations faces serious financial strain. Experts say the problem is not just funding but the UN’s complex, inefficient structure. The UN runs on two types of funding: regular dues from countries and special project funds from donors. Donors often fund short-term projects managed by underpaid consultants. This means some important programs survive but depend on overworked staff. Money meant for field operations often gets diverted to the UN headquarters, mostly in the Global North. Donors, including member states and private sector players, sometimes push their own agendas, making project work tougher. Despite challenges, UN agencies do make a difference. UNESCO resolved conflicts to include Chinese and South Korean programs. The World Health Organization supports free childbirth care in Myanmar. The UN human rights office keeps a watchful eye in Gaza. Local climate action receives a boost through UN Environment Programme projects in Central Asia. UNESCO also trains professionals to restore cultural heritage damaged by war and disasters. All these efforts show the UN’s work is vital but needs a fresh approach. Experts argue that the world should rethink the UN’s role. They want a leaner, less centralized organisation that puts more money and power into frontline projects around the world. This change could improve how the UN helps millions globally.