April 18, 2014


Personal philanthropy should reflect the donor’s passions

2 comments

"It is folly to disparage "donor-driven" philanthropy and contend that, when donors have accumulated the kind of wealth that allows them to make substantial contributions to charities, someone else has the right to tell them how to do it."

Special to Philanthropy Journal

See related article.

I have spent a great portion of my life matching donors' wishes with the needs of 501 (c)(3) organizations, and there is one thing I know: Generally speaking, people give to charities for which they have feelings and passion, and in my opinion, that is a good thing.

I am a pragmatist, and as former North Carolina Governor Terry Sanford once said, "I don't believe in trotting my horse to hear the harness rattle." That is exactly what you are doing if you ask a potential donor who eats, sleeps and breathes Little League Baseball to make a major gift for a new symphony hall - unless, by chance, he or she has a child studying violin at the University of North Carolina School of the Arts. But that same person may gladly give a million bucks for a new ball field for the kids or even research on juvenile sports injuries. 

Most often, people give because people ask them to give. Personal whims and preferences of donors - and even family traditions - do determine where dollars flow, of course. Several years ago, the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation pointed out in an annual report devoted to various facets of philanthropy that often, several generations of a family might be the mainstay for a particular charity. Why should we expect anything else? They heard about Senior Services or the Children's Chorus night after night at the supper table. Wise fundraisers do their homework and craft a package that will strike a chord with potential donors.

Determining the greatest need and which charity makes the greatest impact is subjective. I support a multitude of social service organizations through my annual United Way contribution. I appreciate the needs they address, and I do my part, my fair share. I also view my community holistically and understand that the arts enrich our lives every day, enhance our children's education, create jobs, generate tax revenue to fund essential services and help corporations and businesses attract and retain the creative employees needed for a 21st century knowledge-based economy.

Regardless of how people give, it is important that they give wisely. And these days, people increasingly are doing so. In this economy, dollars are precious, and charitable dollars, in fact, are investments. For years, we have stressed credibility, accountability, sustainability and transparency as key tenets of the fundraising of our funded partners. We set the example at the Arts Council by doing systematic long-range planning and then requiring our grantees to have three-year plans, reviewed by an impartial group of some 15 financially savvy volunteers. 

I agree that rigid formulas of fundraising administrative costs versus grants are not the best tests of effectiveness and efficiency. For example, the Arts Council of Winston-Salem and Forsyth County, like many others, does far more than raise money and make grants. We own and operate arts centers, theatres and parking lots. We sponsor performances and special events. We make public announcements of all our grants, post them online and publish them in our annual reports. We encourage donors to look closely at what we do and how we do it - with grant recipients, at grant panels which we list by name and at our processes. And we get hard questions, which we welcome, from potential donors. 

Honestly, I am a little weary of broad assertions that things are broken and need to be fixed. I do not hold that, because something is not working the way I want it to, it is broken. Philanthropy is not broken. It is working well. More than $300 billion dollars are given to charity each year in this country. Religion is the largest recipient, followed by education, then the environment and the arts.

Like everything else, philanthropy could work better. However, it is folly to disparage "donor-driven" philanthropy and contend that, when donors have accumulated the kind of wealth that allows them to make substantial contributions to charities, someone else has the right to tell them how to do it - regardless of the donors' personal preferences.

Who defines "needs"? At this point, it is interesting to note that studies over the last many years have showed that people on the lower end of the economic scale give a greater percentage of their income to charities than those on the higher end. Their feelings and passions count, also.

You and I can judge, using whatever arbitrary standard we individually choose, the acts of others - here, charitable contributions - and withhold praise when it suits us. That is our privilege. But the notion of creating a hierarchy of "goodness" and ignoring the contributions of those who do not share our values defines reason. Because the "whims and preferences" of others do not conform to ours does not mean we are right and they are wrong. Will St. Peter stand at the Pearly Gates and separate those who contributed to the arts from those who contributed to feeding of the poor? I think not.

Milton Rhodes is the president and CEO of the Arts Council of Winston-Salem and Forsyth County, the first locally established arts council in the United States. He is retiring at the end of September after leading the organization since 2004.



Comment on this article

Comments

Excellent dialogue that has started with these columns! Two thoughts come to mind in reading the authors' perspectives.

First, as individuals (both professionals and volunteers) encouraging charitable investments, we have a responsibility to be transparent and candid about what those investments can and cannot achieve. In doing so, we lay the groundwork for good philanthropy that matches the interests and goals of each individual or family, as Milton stated very well.

Second, there is a bigger question to ask. How do we as a community most effectively address the challenges we face? Whether this is in the area of human services, the arts, animal welfare, or the environment, we need to educate ourselves and others about the interaction of resources that will either help us move towards greater impact or limit our ability to make a difference. Helping people understand the context of their gift and educating them on how the impact of their gift is affected by public policy, public financing, community trends, etc. is equally important. To view a philanthropic gift in isolation leaves out the reality of how the world works. Philanthropists would benefit from the insight from others and that they can secure themselves by looking at the full picture of how their gift will used to achieve results. In addition, their passion can be used to influence the other factors that will either magnify or diminish what they hope to achieve through their generosity.

Thank you to both Milton and Eric for their thoughtful comments.

Thank you Milton for this article that really makes one think about charitable giving. I think anyone intending to make a donation to a charity does indeed want to make a difference, and help as many people as possible. As we all have varied interests, what a charity means to each other will also differ. Someone may feel compelled to donate to a religious group, or an animal organization, or to feed the hungry. Donors should feel encouraged to make contributions that they are comfortable with to the organization of their choice.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options


Popular Content

Webinar Archive

Did you miss a Philanthropy Journal webinar? You can purchase previously recorded PJ webinars online. Purchase webinar recording

Connect with PJ

Facebook  Twitter  
PJ Google+  PJ LinkedIn


Nonprofit Jobs

Resource Directory

  • BasicFunder Premier
    Simple, insightful, feature rich, easy-to-use: Donor & Fundraising Software.
  • FundTrack Software
    Provider of web-based (ePhilanthrAppeal) constituent management software.

Our Home

North Carolina State University Institute for Nonprofits at N.C. State University

Our Partners