Previously Posted News
Billionaire givingJuly 21, 2010: Billionaires and the “Giving Pledge”
Last week, Paul Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft, announced that he planned to donate over half of his $13.5 billion dollar fortune. Although Mr. Allen has been very generous to his various foundations and nonprofit organizations over the years, his announcement indicates that he plans to do more in the future.
So why now? Allen is not the first billionaire to make bold pledges to the world of philanthropy. He joins the ranks of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, both of whom plan to give at least half of their fortunes to philanthropic work. Buffett made headlines when he announced that he planned to give 99% of his wealth away.
Gates and Buffett have started an initiative called the “Giving Pledge.” They are urging other billionaires to give away at least half of their fortunes to philanthropic causes.
It goes without saying that if this Giving Pledge gained traction, there would be a major influx of private, philanthropic dollars flowing through the foundations and non-profit organizations in the U.S. and around the world.
However, the initiative raises a number of questions regarding the timing of this funding, the needed public accountability, and the likely recipients of the extra funds.
Pablo Eisenberg raises a crucial point: much of the giving that these billionaires currently do is to large, greenhouse organizations. Universities, arts & cultural organizations, and hospitals all benefit more from these funds than smaller, grassroots organizations do.
As we watch the impact of the Giving Pledge in the future, we must also watch the systems that guide philanthropic enterprise.
We must remain cognizant of the possible inequities between large and small nonprofits and ensure that the influx of more dollars does not widen the growing gap.
For a current profile of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation click here.
Dodgers PhilanthropyJuly 13, 2010: Dodgers Charity Comes Under Fire
Considering that in the world of institutional giving, administrative and operational costs are a necessary evil, the manager of the LA Dodgers Dream Foundation (DDF) has some explaining to do.
The New York Times recently revealed that the Dodgers executive who heads up the operation of the Dodgers Dream Foundation earned $401,395 in 2007. It is certainly not unheard of for charity directors to make a generous living; it is, however, unheard of for a charity with a $1.6 million dollar budget to pay an executive almost 25% of the budget.
Howard Sunkin, the executive in question, is the team’s senior vice president for public affairs. As part of this formalized role, he apparently worked 40 hours a week for the Dodgers Dream Foundation—a job that he was rewarded handsomely for in 2007.
Although there is no official proof otherwise, there is suspicion that the 40 hours a week was a gross overestimation of how much Sunkin actually worked for the DDF. He was paid an additional salary for other work he did with the Dodgers, but the organization refused to say how much.
The news of this astounding level of pay has sent waves through the Dodgers organization, which has already been questioned regarding its funding priorities and the possibility of tax evasion.
It is common for major league baseball teams to operate charities, generally aimed at recreation and youth development. However, the directors of these charities usually do not receive additional compensation. Some MLB charities do hire designated executive directors but usually pay these positions less than $100,000 a year.
From the look of things, the Dodgers Dream Foundation is not only out of sync internally, but it is also out of sync in the world of MLB institutional giving.
For a current profile of the Dodgers Dream Foundation click here.
Impacts of Arizona Immigration lawJune 15, 2010: The Philanthropic Impact of Arizona’s Immigration Reform
On Friday, April 23, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed a highly contentious immigration bill into law.
Although the controversy surrounding this legislation has focused on federal versus state power and human rights, the impact on philanthropic and nonprofit organizations is difficult to overlook.
Consider the work of social services nonprofits in Arizona.
These organizations are already seeing negative effects of the legislation—victims of abuse are deciding against filing police reports and non profit staff members are advising undocumented clients to be overly cautious so as to avoid any police contact.
The decline in Latino clientele is not the only concern of Arizona nonprofits. Some philanthropic organizations are weary of funding nonprofits who are serving undocumented immigrants; others are going so far as to require proof of the legality of client’s residency in Arizona.
Although some grant makers are taking a hard-lined approach, others are working to raise awareness and support national efforts for immigration reform.
Foundations like the Open Society Institute and the Carnegie Corporation are expected to spearhead efforts in support of immigration reform.
Some groups are already working to prepare immigrants for the possibility of federal immigration legislation; one group gives undocumented immigrants a “10 Commandments” flier that outlines steps to take: being honest with public officials, keeping kids in school, and learning to speak English.
Ultimately, it seems that grant makers need to continue to look into the future to anticipate the needs of undocumented immigrants, especially if reform is expected to pave the way to citizenship.
For a current profile of the Open Society Institute click here.
Oprah's Angel Network Dissolves June 4, 2010: Celebrity Philanthropy
According to the Oprah’s Angel Network website, the public charity is no longer accepting grant proposals or donations and plans to dissolve after the final dispersal of its remaining funds.
Recipients that have already been identified will still receive the funding that was promised to them through the Angel Network.
The Angel Network was started in 1998 primarily through donations from the viewers of Oprah’s talk show. In the time since, the Angel Network has worked tirelessly building schools around the world and supporting domestic efforts such as Hurricane Katrina aftermath.
In the wake of the news about the disintegration of Oprah’s Angel Network, we thought it would be interesting to take a look at other celebrities’ philanthropic efforts throughout the years.
Oprah has consistently been among the top celebrity philanthropists throughout the years; others such as Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have also been consistently charitable. However, do not be fooled by the celebrity name attached to charitable organizations.
According to a Forbes article, celebrity foundations touting the names of Tyra Banks, Justin Timberlake, and Jerry Seinfeld often spent more in administrative costs than in charitable donations.
Garth Brooks’ Foundation Teammates for Kids is still open for business, its website reports that it is not accepting grant proposals at this time.
Unfortunately it seems that sometimes in the world of celebrity philanthropy, marketing a philanthropic image is just as important as championing philanthropic causes.
For a current profile of the Oprah Angel Network click here.
Positive Signs in the World of PhilanthropyMay 28, 2010: Reverse Psychology
According to a report released on Thursday, May 27, in the coming year, philanthropy is expected to make a marked turnaround from recession-period slumps. The Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College expects charitable giving to grow between $222 and $227 billion in 2010.
While 2010 marks the beginning of a brighter future for charitable giving, the study reports that we will not see pre-recession levels of charitable giving until 2011 at the earliest.
The study used a variety of public sources, including but not limited to data from the Federal Reserve, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Dow Jones.
The Center on Wealth and Philanthropy report is just one sign of recovery in the world of philanthropy. A recent story in the Californian called attention to the Walmart Foundation’s California State Giving Program.
The news item delivered unexpected news, especially in the context of the economic decline that has pervaded America and the world’s news over the last two years.
Walmart Foundation’s California State Giving Program is reporting that its funds have gone nearly “untapped” since its 2008 creation.
The California giving program is having such a difficult time drawing attention that Walmart officials recently held a news conference to publicize the fund and to encourage local nonprofit organizations to apply.
Could this be a sign that times are not quite as tough as the nonprofit world assumes them to be? Perhaps both new stories are harbingers of good things to come…
For a current profile of the Walmart Foundation and the Foundation's state-specific funding programs, click here.
Gulf Coast Oil SpillMay 20, 2010: New Orleans Disaster Philanthropy Redux
As Marco Cocito-Monoc of the Regional Initiatives Greater New Orleans Foundation stated in a recent blog posting, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the Gulf Coast has “created the framework for a more coordinated philanthropic approach to addressing how [they] adapt to [their] changing environment in a manner that respects the diverse social and geographic contexts in which coastal communities find themselves.”
This coordinated philanthropy has quickly proven to be a major asset in dealing with the continuing havoc stemming from the Gulf Coast oil spill.
Local community foundations like the Greater New Orleans Community Foundation and the Greater Escambia Community Foundation have set up emergency funds to help nonprofits assisting in the relief efforts and to support victims of the spill.
National organizations such as the National Audubon Society, the National Wildlife Federation, and Idealist.org are working to gather volunteers, raise money and protect the region’s environmental treasures.
Not only have many regional foundations stepped in to provide focused support, but celebrities have also banded together to provide funds toward the effort as well.
For example, the Gulf Aid concert was held Sunday, May 16 and included famous performers such as Lenny Kravitz, Mos Def, Ani DiFranco among others. The proceeds from the concert will go toward helping fishing families and restoring affected wetlands.
For a current profile of the Greater New Orleans Foundation and the foundation's plans for short-term and long-term disaster relief funding, click here.
Are Babies Good Fundraisers?May 2, 2010
Put That Baby to Work!
Ever wondered how really effective baby photos are in fundraising materials?
From one of our favorite blogs. the Neuromarketing blogsite (http://www.neurosciencemarketing.com/blog/):
One of my all-time most popular posts is Child Labor: Put That Baby to Work!, which showed how orienting a baby picture so that the baby was looking toward the headline of an ad caused people to spend more time reading that headline.
There’s another effect that baby pictures have: they can boost altruistic behavior. An interesting experiment in Edinburgh showed the power of a baby picture compared to other images
Hundreds of wallets were planted on the streets of Edinburgh by psychologists last year. Perhaps surprisingly, nearly half of the 240 wallets were posted back. But there was a twist.
Richard Wiseman, a psychologist, and his team inserted one of four photographs behind a clear plastic window inside, showing either a smiling baby, a cute puppy, a happy family or a contented elderly couple. Some wallets had no image and some had charity papers inside.
When faced with the photograph of the baby people were far more likely to send the wallet back, the study found. In fact, only one in ten were hard-hearted enough not to do so. With no picture to tug at the emotions, just one in seven were sent back.
According to Dr Wiseman the result reflects a compassionate instinct towards vulnerable infants that people have evolved to ensure the survival of future generations. “The baby kicked off a caring feeling in people, which is not surprising from an evolutionary perspective,” he said. [From TimesOnline - Want to keep your wallet? Carry a baby picture.]
The results were quite startling. Fully 88% of the wallets with the baby photo were returned. The next best rate was the puppy photo, at 53%. A family photo netted a 48% return rate, while an elderly couple picture scored only 28%.
Attention nonprofit marketers: Want to keep your wallet? Carry baby pictures. Want to win hearts and minds? Apparently, the answer is the same.
Corporate Donors to Haiti Relief CharitiesCorporate Giving for Haiti Relief According to the Business Civic Leadership Center, a corporate giving research center, these are the major corporate gifts for Haitian relief as of Sunday January 17.
Abbott $1 million in grants and in-kind donations of critical pharmaceutical and nutritional products; portions of grant monies allocated to American Red Cross, Partners in Health, and Catholic Medical Mission Board
Advent Software $25,000 to Partners in Health; employee-donation matching program for Partners in Health, matched 1:1 up to $12,500
Aetna Activated 47 volunteer councils to engage with relief agencies by collecting funds and goods
Air Products $25,000 to the American Red Cross for the Haiti Relief & Development Fund
Alcon Laboratories $1 million worth of eye drops and eye-related antibiotics and ointments; in partnership with Project Hope, AmericCares, Direct Relief International and Heart to Heart
The Allstate Foundation $100,000: $50,000 to the American Red Cross, $50,000 in employee matching
Altria Group Inc. $100,000 to the American Red Cross; ongoing employee matching gifts program that will match 1:1 up to $30,000 per employee
American Express $250,000 directed to the American Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, International Rescue Committee and the United Nations' Friends of the World Food program; matching employee donations; offering rebate on the merchant discount rate for charitable contributions made on the American
Express Card directly to any of the NGos listed on the USAID website in support of Haiti relief - effective retroactively from Jan. 12-Feb. 28, 2010
Amerijet International On 1/15/10 opened its facilities in Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Houston, adn New York to collect rice, dried beans, tents, and money -- all donations will be transported to Haiti by air
Amgen $2 million
AMR (American Airlines and American Eagle parent company Offering bonus reward miles for donations to the American Red Cross; delivering aid supplies to Port-au-Prince
Amway $100,000 to the American Red Cross and SOS Children's Village
Astoria Federal Savings $25,000; employee-donation matching up to $25,000 to benefit the American Red Cross, International Medical Corps or Americares
AstraZeneca $163,150 to the British Red Cross Emergency Appeal
AT&T Facilitating text message donations of $10; 100% of texted donations goes to the American Red Cross
Bank of Montreal $243,000
Bank of America $1 million; 50% of which directed to the American Red Cross
Baxter $1 million; $350,000 to support both immediate, acute-care and longer-term needs; support for the American Red Cross International Diesaster Relief Fund and CARE.
Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) $1.2 million; $550,000 directed to American Red Cross, U.S. Fund for UNICEF, AmeriCares, Catholic Medical Mission Board, Direct Relief International, Heart to Heart International, Partners in Health, Project HOPE and Save the Children; $500,000 in medical equipment; employee-donation match of up to $150,000 for the U.S. Fund for UNICEF
Best Buy Employees in Puerto Rica are organizing with the San Juan Municipality to send food and other items
BMO Financial $250,000 to the American Red Cross
BP Foundation Will match employee donations worldwide 1:1
Bristol-Myers Squibb $200,000; employee-donation matching of 2:1
Broadview Networks $5,000, plus facilitating employee donations through payroll deductions
CA $50,000 to the American Red Cross; employee-donation match of up to $150,000 for various organizations
Campbell Soup Co. $200,000
The Canon Group $220,000 to the American Red Cross
Cargill $50,000 to CARE and the World Food Programme
Caterpillar $200,000 to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent relief efforts; also will match 1:1 employee, retiree, and dealer donations up to $100,000
Chiquita Brands International Inc. up to $200,000, involving an employee match of 1:1
Chubb Corporation $500,000; $125,000 to Doctors Without Borders, $125,000 Share Our Strength, $250,000 in employee match
CIGNA $50,000 to the American Red Cross, plus an additional match of employee donations to the Red Cross up to $50,000
Cisco Foundation $250,000 to the American Red Cross, plus employee-donation match of up to $1 million
Citigroup Sent a team and medical equipment, humanitarian supplies and satellite phones
Coca-Cola $1 million to the American Red Cross
ConAgra $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Cogeco Cable $50,000 to the American Red Cross
Comcast $1 million
ConAgra $100,000 to the American Red Cross
ConocoPhillips $1 million to the American Red Cross
Credit Agricole $1.45 million (1 million euros)
Credit Suisse $1 million divided between the American and Swiss Red Cross societies; employee-donation matching worldwide of 2:1 to benefit Red Cross societies
Crocs Donating thousands of pairs of shoes
CSRwire Waived all fees for all news releases relating to aid in rescue and recovery efforts
Desjardins $292,000 to the American Red Cross
DHL Deployed Disaster Response Team to manage logistics for inbound freight at the airport, including transfer and distribution of incoming relief goods
Diageo plc 45,000 lbs of food and emergency supplies
Digicel $5 million to various NGOs leading relief efforts
Discover Financial Services $100,000 to the American Red Cross; matching donations of Cashback program customers up to $1 million; employee-donation matching of 1:1
The Dow Chemical Company $500,000 to the American Red Cross Haiti
Earthquake Relief Fund; employee-donation matching up to $250,000 (combined) to benefit the World Food Programme and CARE
DuPont $100,00 for the American Red Cross Haiti Relief & Development Fund
E. On U.S. LLC (Louisville Gas & Electric and Kentucky Utilities Co. parent company) $50,000 to the American Red Cross, Salvation Army, and United Way
Eaton Corporations $100,000 to the American Red Cross International Disaster Relief Fund; employee-donation matching to benefit the United Way Worldwide Disaster Relief Fund
Eli Lilly and Company $250,000; 50% pledged for immediate relief and 50% pledged for long-term recovery; NGO recipients to be announced
EnCana Offering 2:1 match of employee donations; many relief agencies are eligible but EnCana suggests World Vision and the U.S. Fund for UNICEF
Excelon Corporation $50,000 to the American Red Cross International Response Fund and the U.S. Fund for UNICEF; employee-donation matching of up to $250,000 to benefit the same two organizations
FedEx $425,000 divided among the American Red Cross International Relief Fund, Salvation Army, Direct Relief International, and Yéle; transporting 78 pallets of supplies to the disaster zone in partnership with relief agenices (total cash and in-kind exceeds $1 million)
First Energy Foundation Matching employee donations to the American Red Cross International Response Fund
FPL Group Foundation $100,000 to the American Red Cross Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund
General Electric Company $2.5 million: immediate disbursement of $1 million to the American Red Cross and $500,000 to the U.S. Fund for UNICEF; the remainder to be allocated as the situation changes
General Mills Foundation $250,000: $100,000 to the American Red Cross International Relief Fund and $150,000 to CARE
GenNX360 $25,000 to the American Red Cross Haiti Relief and Development Fund
GlaxoSmithKline Donated cash and medicine, mostly oral and topical antibiotics; further commitments will be made as local infrastructure is repaired
GM Foundation $100,000 to the American Red Cross
GoDaddy.com $500,000
Goldman Sachs $1 million
Google $1 million to UNICEF and CARE
Hanes Brands $25,000
Harris Teeter $25,000; allowing customers to purchase $1 and $5 relief cards
Health net Inc. $50,000 plus matching employee donations
Heinz Company Contribution to the World Food Programme
Henry Schein Inc. $1 million worth of medical supplies to partner NGOs
Hewlett-Packard Co. $500,000 to the American Red Cross International Response Fund; employee-donations matching of 1:1 up to $250,000 to benefit Global Impact
Home Depot Foundation $100,000 to the American Red Cross; matching employee donations up to $1,000
Hormel Foods Corporation Matching employee donations of up to $25,000 to the American Red Cross
Humana Foundation $150,000; $100,000 for immediate support, with $50,000 allocated to employee-donation matching
IBM $150,000 in technology and technical services
IDT Corporation Using its services to help customers contact loved ones in Haiti; setting up calling stations in Haiti in hotels and other locations in partnership with Access Haiti; donating 4,000 calling cards to U.S. Haitian communities in New York and Florida and lowered calling rates to Haiti to $.02 per minute
Intel $250,000 commitment and an employee-donation match of 1:1 to one or more strategic NGO partners; coordinating an IT response team to provide technology and technical expertise
International Paper $50,000 plus an employee-donation match of 1:1 up to $100,000 (employee fundraising effort spearheaded by the chairman
ITT $100,000 to Mercy Corps, plus the donation of five water treatment units which will provide water for 100,000 people
Jefferies Group $1 million to the American Red Cross, UNICEF, Save the Children, and the UN Central Emergency Response Fund; also raised $4.5 million by allocating all net commissions and salaries from the 1/15/10 trading day to earthquake response
JM Family Enterprises Inc. and Southeast Toyota Distributors LLC $100,000 to the American Red Cross
JP Morgan Chase $1 million
Kellogg Company $250,000 to the American Red Cross
Kimberly-Clark Sponsoring a shipment of medical supplies in partnership with MedShare; supporting the American Red Cross through the Annual Disaster Giving Plan
KPMG $500,000 for relief and long-term recovery via corporate contributions, employee donations and matching
Kraft Foods $25,000 to the American Red Cross
Limited Brands $100,000 to the American Red Cross Haiti Relief and Development Fund
Lowe's Companies Inc. $1 million to the American Red Cross
Major League Baseball $1 million to UNICEF
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company $100,000 to the American Red Cross International Relief Fund/Haiti; revising matching-gifts program for six months to include matches to the American Red Cross and Habitat for Humanity
Mattel $10,000 to Save the Children
Marathon Oil Company $100,000; 50% to the American Red Cross and 50% to UNICEF
Mastercard Allowing cardholders to transfer their reward points to a cash donation to the Canadian Red Cross
McDonald's Corporation $500,000 to the International Federation of the Red Cross; matching donations from Arcos Dorados expecting to equal another $500,000
McKesson $200,000 in cash (American Red Cross) and medical supplies (World Vision) including crutches, orthopedic braces, gauze, masks and mosquito nets; matching employee donations 1:1; helping HHS by quickly fulfilling orders for vaccines and medicines bound for Haiti
Menchie Hosting an Haiti Earthquake Support Day on Fri., Jan. 15, 2010, at all locations across country; 5% of sales on Support Day will go the American Red Cross
Merck $550,000: $350,000 cash to several NGOs to support the deployment of emergency response units, disaster specialists, blankets, clean water, therapuetic food, medical supplies, and temporary shelters; shipped $200,000 worth of pharmaceutical products; matching employee donations
Microsoft $1.25 million in cash and in-kind donations; employee-donation matching up to $12,000; mobilization of employee response team and technical support of NGOs operating on the ground
MoneyGram International $10,000 to the Pan American Development Foundation
Morgan Stanley $1 million to the American Red Cross Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund
The Mosaic Company $500,000 to the American Refugee Committee, Canadian Red Cross, American Red Cross, and International Red Cross
Motorola $100,000 to the American Red Cross, plus a pledge of up to $25,000 in matched dollars for employee donations
National Bank $250,000 to the Canadian Red Cross
National Grid $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Nestle Waters North America $1 million worth of bottled water
News Corp. $250,000 to the American Red Cross and Salvation Army; employee-donation matching up to $250,000 to benefit numerous NGOs
New York Yankees $500,000
Northern Trust $250,000 to the American Red Cross
Office Depot $20,000 split between Doctors Without Borders and Feed the Children; 2.500 backpacks donated to Feed the Children; underwriter of the
National Disaster Help Desk for Business, a service by BCLC ($100,000 value)
Panasonic $109,962 (10 million yen) for relief and recovery
PepsiCo Foundation $1 million; $500,000 divided among the American Red Cross, Save the Children, and Friends of the World Food Program; $500,000 allocated for longer-term rebuilding efforts
Pfizer Cash donation and employee-matching; working with partners to assess which products are needed most
PRNewswire Waived all fees for all news releases relating to aid in rescue and recovery efforts
Procter & Gamble Sending PUR Purifier of Water devices to Haiti
Project Earth H20 Donating $3 of every bottle it sells to Direct Relief International until Feb. 28, 2010
Publix $100,000 to the American Red Cross for the Haiti Relief & Development Fund
RBC $100,000 to the Red Cross Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund
ReCellular Collecting used cell phones and sending proceeds to the American Red Cross
Reynolds American Inc. $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Rite Aid $50,000 to the American Red Cross International Response Fund; sponsoring employee fundraising and customer fundraising by selling $1 relief certificates
Rockwell Collins $10,000 to the American Red Cross
Rogers Communications $250,000 to Partners in Health
Royal Caribbean $1 million for relief; re-opening port calls at Labadee, Haiti
Safeway Inc. $100,000 to the American Red Cross and UNICEF
ScotiaBank $250,000 to the Canadian Red Cross
Sempra Energy Foundation $50,000 to the American Red Cross International Relief Fund
SES World Skies Donating satellite capacity on five spacecraft and access to teleport facilities
The Shell Oil Company $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Sol Inc. $300,000 worth of solar LED lighting, plus a matching program whereby a solar light system is donated when one is purchased
Southern Company Charitable Foundations $50,000 to the American Red Cross
Spirit Airlines Offering free miles for donors ($5+) to the American Red Cross, Yéle Haiti, and UNICEF
Sprint $50,000 to the American Red Cross
Staples Inc. $100,000 to the American Red Cross for Haiti relief and development
Symantec $50,000 to CARE; employee-donation matching of up to $1,000 per employee
Target $500,000 to the American Red Cross, plus the donation of more than 1 million meals
TD Bank $100,000 to the Red Cross
Tenet Healthcare Corporation $50,000 to the American Red Cross Haiti Relief and Development
Tesco $81,600 to the Red Cross
Thrivent Financial for Lutherans Matching 1:2 in member donations for a maximum of $1 million
TJX Companies $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Toyota $500,000 to the American Red Cross, Save the Children and Doctors Without Borders
Toys R Us $150,000 to Save the Children
Travel Guard Providing free emergency travel and medical assistance services to travelers and families affected by the earthquake
UBS $500,000 to the American Red Cross International Response Fund
Unilever $500,000 to the UN World Food Programme
UnitedHealth $100,000 to the American Red Cross International Response Fund; employee-donation matching of 1:1 up to $250,000 to benefit Global Impact
United Technologies Corporation $250,000 cash to the American Red Cross; matching employee donations up to $250,000
UPS $1 million to the American Red Cross, CARE, UNICEF and others
U.S. Bancorp $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Verizon Foundation $100,000 to World Vision and Food for the Poor; facilitating text donations to support the American Red Cross
Visa $200,000 to the American Red Cross
The Vitamin Shoppe $10,000 to K.I.D.S.; donated a truckload of water and energy bars worth more than $20,000 to be distributed in Haiti by K.I.D.S. through World Vision and Operation Compassion
Wakefern Food Corp. (ShopRite and PriceRite stores) $250,000 to the American Red Cross
Walgreens $100,000 to the American Red Cross; also providing water, food, and medical supplies to the University of Miami Global Institute for Community Health and Development, which set up clinics and triage units in Port-au-Prince
Walmart $500,000 to the American Red Cross; $100,000 worth of donated pre-packaged food kits requested by the Red Cross
Walmart Canada $100,000 to Project Haiti Relief
The Walt Disney Co. $100,000 to the American Red Cross Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund
Wells Fargo $100,000 to the American Red Cross
Western Union $250,000 to NGOs including Mercy Corps and Save the Children
YUM! Brands $500,000 allocated from its World Hunger Relief effort to provide food for victims
Funders on TwitterDecember 21, 2009 Funders Find Twitter as Information and Pontification Platform
The good people at Philanthropy 411 Blog (http://philanthropy411.wordpress.com/) have begun compiiling names and addresses of foundations, grantmakers, philanthropoids, and other philanthrop-related groups who use Twitter. Our webpage doesn't allow live links, but below are the organizations, locations, and twitter addresses.
130 Foundations (and counting) on Twitter
Alaska Community Foundation (Anchorage, AK) @AKCommunity
The Allstate Foundation* (Northbrook, IL) @clicktoempower
American Institute for Cancer Research* (Washington, DC) @aicrtweets
Australian Cancer Research Foundation* (Sydney, Australia) @Cancer_Research
Alexander Abraham Foundation* (New York, NY) @aabrahamfound
Annie E. Casey Foundation (Baltimore, MD) @AnnieECaseyFndn
Anthony Robbins Foundation (San Diego, CA) @AR_foundation
Armstrong County Community Foundation (Kittanning, PA) @ACCF
Ashoka* (Arlington, VA) @AshokaTweets
AshokaTech* – Ashoka’s Technology Blog (Arlington, VA) @AshokaTech
Ashoka’s Changemaker program* (Washington, DC) @Changemakers
Ashoka’s YouthVenture program* (Arlington, VA) @AshokaGenV
Atlantic Philanthropies (New York, NY) @atlantic
Baltimore Community Foundation (Baltimore, Maryland) @baltcommfdn
Black Benefactors* (Washington, DC) @BlkBenefactors
Black Card Circle Foundation (Los Angeles, CA) @BCCF
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Seattle, WA) @gatesfoundation
The Bonnie J. Addario Lung Cancer Foundation* (San Francisco, CA) @a_breath_away
Bridge Builders Community Foundations (Oil City, Pennsylvania) @BBCF
The Broad Foundation (Los Angeles, CA) @BroadFoundation
Carl B & Florence E. King Foundation (Dallas, TX) @kingfoundation
Carnegie Corporation of New York* (New York, NY) @CarnegieCorp
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Stanford, CA) @CarnegieFdn
Case Foundation (Washington, DC) @CaseFoundation
Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation (Tulsa, OK) @clsff
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation (Flint, MI) @mottfoundation
Chicago Foundation for Women (Chicago, IL) @ChiFdn4Women
The Cleveland Foundation (Cleveland, OH) @CleveFoundation
Coastal Community Foundation of South Carolina (Charleston, SC) @GeorgeStevens
The Colorado Health Foundation* (Denver, CO) @COHealthFDN
Columbia Foundation* (Columbia, MD) @ColumbiaFdn
The Columbus Foundation (Columbus, OH) @colsfoundation
The Community Foundation Boulder County (Bolder, CO) @CommFound
Community Foundation for Calderdale (Halifax, UK) @CalderdaleFound
The Community Foundation for Greater Buffalo (Buffalo, NY) @CFGB
Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan* (Detroit, MI) @cfsem
Community Foundation for Southern Arizona* (Tuscon, AZ) @SoAZCommunityFd
The Community Foundation for Southwest Washington (Vancouver, WA) @CFSWW
Community Foundation for The Fox Valley Region (Appleton, Wisconsin) @CFFoxValley
The Community Foundation in Jacksonville* (Jacksonville, FL) @CJacksonville
The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham (Birmingham, AL) @comfoundbham
The Community Foundation of Sarasota County* (Sarasota, FL) @NonprofitSRQ
Community Foundation of Medicine Hat & Southeastern Alberta (Alberta, Canada) @CFMH
The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee (Nashville, TN) @CFMT
The Community Foundation for Palm Beach & Martin Counties* (West Palm Beach, FL) @cfpmbc
Community Foundation of South East Kansas (Pittsburg, KS) @CFSEK
The Community Foundation of The Lowcountry (Hilton Head Island, SC) @cflowcountry
Community Shares of Milwaukee* (Madison, WI) @MKEshares
Community Shares of Minnesota* (St. Paul, MN) @changeisbetter
Community Shares of Wisconsin* (Madison, WI) @CommSharesWI
Crossroads Community Foundation (MetroWest area of Massachusetts) @CCFDN
The Dale Jr. Foundation (Mooresville, NC) @tdjf
Dallas Social Venture Partners (Dallas, TX) @DallasSVP
Detroit Foundation (Detroit, MI) @dfoundation
EchoingGreen* (New York, NY) @echoinggreen
Eychaner Foundation (Des Moines, IA) @eychanerfndn
Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation (Kansas City, MO) @KauffmanFDN
Flinn Foundation (Phoenix, AZ) @biozonanews
Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation* (Morristown, NJ) @grdodge
GivenGain Foundation (Switzerland) @GivenGain
GlobalGiving* (Washington, DC) @globalgiving
Grand Rapids Community Foundation (Grand Rapids,MI) @GRCommFound
The Greater Cincinnati Foundation (Cincinnati, OH) @GrCinciFdn
Greater Kansas City Community Foundation (Kansas City, MO) @gkccf
The Greater Saint John Community Foundation (St. John, New Brunswick) @GSJCF
Gulf Coast Community Foundation of Venice (Venice, FL) @GulfCoastCF
Hawaii Community Foundation (Honolulu, HI) @HCFHawaii
Headwaters Foundation for Justice* @HeadwatersFdn
HealthCare Foundation of Greater Kansas City (Kansas City, MO) @HCF4KC
The Hopi Foundation (Kykotsmovi, AZ) @Hopi_Foundation
Horizons Foundation (San Francisco, CA) @horizonsfdn
The James Irvine Foundation* (San Francisco, CA) @IrvineFdn
The Jenzabar Foundation* (Boston, MA) @StudentsCare
Jolkona Foundation (Seattle, WA) @jolkona
Kansas Dental Charitable Foundation (Topeka, KS) @KSDentalFound
Kerstner Foundation (El Segundo, CA) @KerstnerFDN
Knight Foundation (Miami, FL) @knightfdn
MacArthur Foundation (Chicago, IL) @MacFound
Make-A-Wish Foundation* (Phoenix, AZ) @WishAmerica
Micron Foundation (Boise, ID) @Micron_Giving
Milken Foundation (Santa Monica, CA) @Milken
The Moyer Foundation (Seattle, WA) @MoyerFoundation
Ms Foundation (New York, NY) @outrageousacts
NASCAR Foundation (Charlotte, NC) @NASCAR_Foundat
New Profit* (Cambridge, MA) @newprofit
New York State Dental Foundation (Albany, NY) @NYSDF
One Star Foundation (Austin, TX) @onestarfdn
Open Society Institute (New York, NY) @OpenSociety
The Orphan Foundation (Southern CA) @TOF4Orphan
Oshkosh Area Community Foundation (Oshkosh, WI) @OACF
Peery Foundation (Palo Alto, CA) @davepeery
Pittsburgh Foundation (Pittsburgh, PA) @PittsburghFdn
Pride Foundation (Seattle, WA) @PrideFdn
Project Management Institute Educational Foundation* (Newtown Square, PA) @pmief
Rally Foundation (Sandy Springs, GA) @RallyFoundation
Reeve Foundation (Short Hills, NJ) @ReeveFoundation
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Princeton, NJ) @rwjf
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Media Center (Princeton, NJ) @RWJF_mediacntr
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Pioneer Portfolio (Princeton, NJ) @pioneerrwjf
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Public Health Portfolio (Princeton, NJ) @RWJF_PubHealth
Rosa: The UK Fund for Women and Girls (London, UK) @RosaForWomen
The SAFE Foundation (United Kingdom) @SAFEFoundation
Saint Luke’s Foundation (Cleveland, OH) @saintlukesfdn
The Saint Paul Foundation & Minnesota Community Foundation* (Saint Paul, MN) @twofoundations
San Antonio Area Foundation (San Antonio, TX) @SAAFdn
Siemens Foundation (Iselin, NJ) @sfoundation
Sisters of Charity Foundation of South Carolina (Columbia, SC) @SCFSC
The Skillman Foundation* (Detroit, MI) @skillmanfound
Skoll Foundation (Palo Alto, CA) @SkollFoundation
Social Venture Partners Arizona* (Flagstaff, AZ) @tkwoganSVP
Social Venture Partners Boulder County (Boulder, CO) @svpboulder
Social Venture Partners Delaware (Wilmington, DE) @SVPDE
Social Venture Partners Portland (Portland, OR) @SVPPortland
Social Venture Partners San Diego (San Diego, CA) @SVPSanDiego
Social Venture Partners Seattle (Seattle, WA) @paulshoeSVP
Social Venture Partners Toronto (Toronto, Canada) @SVP_Toronto
The Stafford Foundation* (Washington, DC) @Staffordfnd
Sunlight Foundation (Washington, DC) @SunFoundation
Taproot Foundation (San Francisco, CA) @taprootfound
United Nations Foundation (Washington, DC) @unfoundation
United Nations Foundation – Vodafone Foundation’s Technology Partnership* (Washington, DC) @Tech4Dev
The V Foundation (Cary, NC) @TheVFoundation
Venture Philanthropy Partners (Washington, DC) @vppartners
West Central Initiative* (Fergus Falls, MN) @WCIMinn
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (Menlo Park, CA) @Hewlett_Found
William J. Clinton Foundation* (New York, NY) @ClintonTweet
WK Kellogg Foundation (Battle Creek, MI) @WK_Kellogg_Fdn
Women’s Giving Circle of Howard County* @WGCHowardCounty
The Women’s Foundation for a Greater Memphis (Memphis, TN) @WFGM_ORG
The Women’s Foundation of California (San Francisco, CA) @womensfoundca
If you found this blog post useful, subscribe! Follow Philanthropy411 at @Philanthropy411
Worldwide Muslim Fund to Launch -- Expects $10 Billion in 10 YearsNovember 16, 2009 -- World Zakat Fund to Launch in 2010. First Grants by 2011
The first global community foundation for Muslims is launching early next year and hopes to raise nearly $1 billion during its first 10 years.
Initiated by the Malaysian government, the World Zakat Fund is scheduled to launch during the first quarter of 2010 and will start awarding grants by 2011.
The fund currently has $50 million in commitments. Targeted donors are the 40,000 high-net-worth individuals in the Middle East, including some of the four hundred billionaires in the Middle East/North Africa region.
The World Fund's grantmaking and investments will target microfinance activities in rural areas, and faith-compliant liquid investments. The fund will award grants for social projects in the areas of health, clean water provision, education, and housing.
The Lutheran Community Foundation, the Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles, Christian Community Foundation of France, and the US-based National Catholic Community Foundation are similarly structured funds for Christian and Jewish donors.
Muslims around the world who are able to save are expected to pay zakat, typically 2.5% of savings accumulated during the last year. Funds usually help those in poverty or debt, or refugees.
Currently, there are 8-10 Islamic faith-motivated private family foundations in the US. Here's one profile of typical Islamic-based family fund in the US.
For a current profile of the Ansari Family Foundationclick here.
Budget Cuts and FundraisingNovember 2, 2009 -- From Nonprofit Times Weekly: Looking at Budget Cuts and Fundraising Costs in Hard Times
Patrick M. Rooney, executive director of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, offers this advice for nonprofits looking at budget cuts and fundraising.
Evaluating Costs: Rather than simply look to shed every possible cost as a means of just staying afloat right now, organizations should evaluate costs strategically. It's better to spend smart rather than just be as frugal as possible.
Reassess Fundraising Programs: It is important to look carefully at how a fundraising program is managed and evaluated. Difficult times might actually be a good time to reassess.
Increase Spending?: Odd as it sounds, it might be better to spend more on certain aspects of an operation and infrastructure. For example, it is critical to continue to invest in fundraising as a long-term support issue.
Effects of Cuts: Adding or maintaining a business development specialist might be even more important in challenging times to grow existing sources of revenue and identify and develop new ones. If budget cuts have to be made, it is important to evaluate what effect cuts will have on long-term goals.
Church Giving Holds for 2009From the Chronicle of Philanthropy -- October 28, 2009
Church Donations Remain Resilient This Year, Study Finds
More than 70 percent of churches nationwide raised as much or more money in the first half of this year as they did during the same period in 2008, according to a new study.
The study, based on 1,540 mostly Protestant congregations surveyed in August, found that 37 percent raised more and another 34 percent raised the same amount in the first six months of 2009 as they had in 2008. Less than a third reported a decline in donations.
However, compared with a similar survey conducted in 2008, higher percentages of the churches reported a decrease in donations, while lower percentages reported a rise. “This may indicate that the recession has had a greater impact on congregations’ fund-raising receipts in 2009 compared to 2008,” the researchers wrote in a release summarizing their key findings.
The research was a joint project of the Lake Institute on Faith & Giving at Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy and the Alban Institute, a membership organization for congregational leaders.
A third of the congregations in the survey reported making budget cuts in the first half of this year, and another 25 percent reported a flat budget. Nevertheless, most churches retained their efforts to provide needed services in their communities, said William Enright, director of the Lake Institute. When forced to make cuts, he said, they were more likely to freeze salaries and cut back on utilities than they were to cut services.
While some congregations in the survey increased their donations of food and clothing to food banks and shelters this year, others responded to the recession in less traditional ways: holding employment fairs, starting a community garden, or offering financial-planning services.
“I was struck by the selflessness of many congregations,” said Mr. Enright. “Many are having to cut back, but they are maintaining their outreach to their communities. This is a story to be celebrated.”
Celebrity CharitiesSeptember 2, 2009
The Lastest Celebrity Charity List from Charity Navigator (without the ratings)
Thinking about asking your favorite celebrity for a contribution or a guest appearance at your next fundraiser? Be prepared for a reverse request.
According to Charity Navigator, here's the latest list of celebrities with their favorite charities. All of these organizations are unendowed public charities which are fully engaged in fundraising from the public. Only a handful award grants to other public charities.
American Cinematheque - Candice Bergen, Francis Coppola, Goldie Hawn, Martin Scorsese
America's Promise Alliance - Colin Powell
Andre Agassi Foundation - Andre Agassi, Emeril Lagasse, Sir Elton John
Baby Buggy - Jessica Seinfeld
The Children's Health Fund - Paul Simon
College Summit - Don Cheadle
Dove Foundation - Dean Jones, Lisa Whelchel, Michael Medved
Dream Foundation - Kim Kardashian, Priscilla Presley
Elton John AIDS Foundation - Sir Elton John
Farm Aid - Dave Mathews, John Mellencamp, Neil Young, Willie Nelson
Freedom Alliance - Oliver North
Green Dot Public Schools - Oscar De La Hoya
Greenpeace Fund - Bono
Habitat for Humanity International - Jimmy Carter
The Hole in the Wall Gang Fund - Julia Roberts, Paul Newman
International Tennis Hall of Fame - Jim Courier, Pam Shriver, Patrick McEnroe
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International - Mary Moore, Nick Jonas, Sugar Ray Leonard
National Breast Cancer Foundation, - Amy Grant, Bon Jovi, Donny Osmond, Reba McEntire
Natural Resources Defense Council - James Taylor, Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert Redford
The Nature Conservancy - Michael Douglas
New York Restoration Project - Bette Midler
Operation USA - Julie Edwards
Positive Coaching Alliance - Barry Zito, Bart Conner, Bill Bradley, Dean Smith, Doc Rivers, Dot Richardson, Herm Edwards, Kerri Strug, Larry Brown, Nadia Comaneci, Phil Jackson, Ronnie Lott, Summer Sanders, Tony Dorsett
Starlight Children's Foundation - Bob Saget, Corbin Blue, Jamie Curtis
Tiger Woods Foundation - Tiger Woods
Tony La Russa's Animal Rescue Foundation - Tony La Russa
United States Fund for UNICEF - Alyssa Milano, Clay Aiken, India.Arie, Laurence Fishburne, Lucy Liu, Sarah Parker, Téa Leoni
V Foundation - Bill Cosby, Dick Vitale, Mike Kryzewski, Peggy Jenkins
Victory Junction Gang - Adam Petty, Kyle Petty
Vital Voices Global Partnership - Diane von Furstenburg, Sally Field
WITNESS - Peter Gabriel
Women's Sports Foundation - Billie King, Chris Evert, Dominique Dawes, Geena Davis, Holly Hunter, Laila Ali, Martina Navratilova, Sheryl Crow
Africare - Nelson Mandela
After-School All-Stars - Arnold Schwarzenegger
American Heart Association - Andie McDowell
American Humane Association - Paula Abdul
American Parkinson Disease Association - Muhammad Ali
amfAR - Elizabeth Taylor, Harry Belafonte, Natasha Richardson, Sharon Stone
Amnesty International USA - Bono, Nazanin Boniadi
Better World Fund - Ted Turner
Blue Ridge Broadcasting Corporation - Billy Graham
Boomer Esiason Foundation - Boomer Esiason
Chi Chi Rodriguez Youth Foundation - Chi Chi Rodriguez
Columbus Zoo and Aquarium - Jack Hanna
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation - Gloria Reuben, Neal McDonough
Grassroot Soccer - Ethan Zohn
Human Rights First - Sigourney Weaver
Hunter's Hope Foundation - Jim Kelly
International Campaign for Tibet - Richard Gere
John Tracy Clinic -Robert Wagner
KICKSTART - Chuck Norris
Lance Armstrong Foundation - Lnce Armstrong
Last Chance for Animals - Chris DeRose
Magic Johnson Foundation - Earvin Johnson
Make-A-Wish Foundation of America - Jeff Gordon, Jimmie Johnson, Kevin Donnalley, Kevin Sharp, Mariah Carey, Orange County Choppers
Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research - Michael Fox
National Kidney Foundation - Rusty Wallace, Tina Fey
Oprah's Angel Network - Oprah Winfrey
Pajama Program - Ivana Trump
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - Alec Baldwin, Alicia Silverstone, Pamela Anderson, Pink, Woody Harrelson
Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network - Christina Ricci
Ronald McDonald House Charities - Al Roker, Billy Bush, Carl Lewis, Cindy Crawford, Hayden Panettiere, Mario Lopez
Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation - George Schultz, Nancy Reagan, Rudolph Giuliani, Rupert Murdoch, Steve Forbes, T. Pickens
Santa Barbara Zoo - John Cleese
Save the Manatee Club - Jimmy Buffett
Southeastern Legal Foundation - Edwin Meese
Special Olympics - Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bart Conner, Eunice Shriver, Jackie Chan, Maria Shriver, Michael Phelps, Nadia Comaneci, Pierce Brosnan, Scott Hamilton, Timothy Shriver, Vanessa Williams, Yao Ming
Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation - Lee Iacocca
Sundance Institute - Robert Redford
Teammates for Kids Foundation - Garth Brooks
United Nations Foundation - Ted Turner
Women for Women International - Rania Al-Abdullah
Actors and Others for Animals - Betty White, Doris Day
Alaska Wilderness League - Jimmy Carter
Alonzo Mourning Charities - Alonzo Mourning
Boys & Girls Clubs of America - Ashanti, Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Courtney Vance, Cuba Gooding, Jr., Denzel Washington, Edward Olmos, Gen. Wesley Clark, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, Jimmy Rollins, John Mellencamp, John Singleton, Kerry Washington, Mario Lopez, Mark Wahlberg, Martin Sheen, Michael Jordan, Muhammad Ali, Queen Latifah, Ruben Studdard, Shaquille O'Neal, Smokey Robinson, Swin Cash, Usher
Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation - Christopher Reeve
CJ Foundation for SIDS - Don Imus
George Bush Presidential Library Foundation - Andrew Card, Jr., Jeb Bush
Iacocca Foundation - Lee Iacocca
Joe Torre Safe At Home Foundation - Joe Torre
Larry King Cardiac Foundation - Larry King
March of Dimes - Denny Hamlin, Jennifer Lopez, Kelly Clarkson, Nicole Kidman, Sherri Shepherd
Michael Bolton Charities - Michael Bolton
Miracle Flights for Kids - Bruce Jenner, Wayne Newton
Muscular Dystrophy Association - Jerry Lewis
My Stuff Bags Foundation - Michael Reagan
National Inclusion Project - Clay Aiken
Several Sources Shelters - Stephen Baldwin
SOS Children's Villages-USA - Sarah Ferguson
Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance - Julianne Moore
USA for UNHCR - Angelina Jolie
V-Day - Eve Ensler, Jane Fonda, Kerry Washington, Rosario Dawson, Salma Hayek
Wolf Trap Foundation for the Performing Arts - Michelle Obama, Tony Bennett, Trisha Yearwood
American Diabetes Association - Donovan McNabb, Elliott Yamin, Gladys Knight, Greg LeMond, Joan Allen, Lovie Smith, Tony Dungy
Apollo Theater Foundation - Quincy Jones
Baltimore Reads - Cal Ripkin, Jr.
Darrell Green Youth Life Foundation - Darrell Green
Doug Flutie Jr. Foundation For Autism - Doug Flutie
Entertainment Industry Foundation - Charlize Theron, Katie Couric, Pierce Brosnan
The Fresh Air Fund - Mariah Carey, Tiki Barber, Tommy Hilfiger
Helen Woodward Animal Center - Diane Keaton
Leary Firefighters Foundation - Dennis Leary
Marijuana Policy Project Foundation - Adam Carolla, Bill Maher, Jack Black, Jesse Ventura
Operation Lookout - Dyan Cannon
Rainforest Foundation US - Sting, Trudie Styler
Pulte Merges with Centex, Cuts Charitable GivingMay 11 2009: Pulte Merges with Centex, Cuts Charitable Giving
It was bound to happen.
In a $3.1 billion dollar deal, Pulte Homes and Centex Homes have merged. This deal will save Pulte Homes over $350 million dollars per year; a desparately needed savings in the company's current financial condition. But our question “How will this merger affect the corporate giving of each company?” has already been answered.
Historically a merger of companies has two major affects on its corporate giving.
First, the math of the “merger effect” on corporate giving is typically 1+1≠2. In 2007, Pulte Homes, Inc. and its employees gave away 3 million dollars to deserving organizations. Centex did not publish its giving level. In a recent update, Pulte announced that due to the economic crisis, they have suspended their corporate giving in 2009 and will decide in late, if they will reinstate the giving program in 2010. Centex has not yet made an announcement. In this case, maybe 1+1=0.
Second, “The Alpha CEO (the one who emerges as the CEO of the newly combined corporation) gets to determine what type, what programs, and how much philanthropy the new company will have.” Pulte has historically funded housing, education, health, human service, and environmental organizations throughout the United States, but with a specific focus in Michigan. Centex funds the same, but also focuses on arts organizations and their recipients are mainly in Texas.
The merger of Pulte and Centex most likely will save their respective companies, but may extinguish the charitable giving of the newly formed company.
For a profile of Pulte Homes Corporate Giving Program click here.
New CEO at John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur FoundationMarch 10, 2009: According to a note from the foundation Robert Gallucci, dean of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, will become the (fifth) president of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation in July 2009. He takes over the foundation, one of the largest in the U.S. at a time when its assets, like those of most other foundations, have fallen while demands for its help are increasing.
Before joining Georgetown in 1996, Mr. Gallucci held a variety of posts at the State Department, including serving as chief negotiator during the North Korean nuclear crisis in 1994 and as deputy executive chairman of the United Nations commission overseeing disarmament in Iraq after the first gulf war.
Mr. Gallucci will be the fourth academic leader to become president of the Foundation.
The first and only non-academician foundation president was Paul Doolen, chief financial officer for the MacArthur insurance company, Bankers Life and Casualty. He served from the establishment of the foundation in 1978 to 1980.
Then a series of academic leaders -- Dr. John Corbally, former provost of Ohio State University was the second president of the foundation. He served from 1980 until 1989 and was followed by Dr. Adele Simmons, former president of Hampton College (MA) who served from 1989 to 1999.
Dr. Jonathan Fanton, former president of the New School for Social Research in New York City, was the fourth foundation president serving from 1999 to this coming July.
Wikipedia has a short, interesting biography of Mr. Gallucci, and his work in the U.S. State Department, the National War College, the United Nations, and Georgetown University.
For a current profile of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundationclick here.
Foundation Funding Shifts for Minnesota Youth Organizations and Changes in Individual GivingJanuary 10, 2009: Two Surveys: Foundation Funding Shifts in Minnesota Youth Programs and Shifts in Individual Giving
We have received several inquiries about changes in foundation giving patterns. Since many of our clients are youth-related, we talked to several foundations that historically give to youth groups.
At the same time, we have been talking to individual donors about what changes they are making in their giving priorities.
While we do not usually publish our surveys, we thought the results of these two surveys might be of interest to a broader audience.
Institutional Giving Survey: We contacted 60 Minnesota foundations/corporate giving programs that
a) award more than $500,000 per year
b) have historically funded youth-related issues, beyond education (including early childhood education) and health.
Of these 60 funders, 35 funders responded by telephone or through email.
Of these 35 youth funding foundations, 22 funders have or intend to make short term or long term changes in their funding priorities.
Of these 22 youth-related funders, 18 funders either have or will probably decrease their funding for youth-related activities (outside of education and health).
These changes will occur through either
a) Reducing giving overall
b) Reducing giving to youth or direct service agencies that are not emergency related
c) Increasing giving to current priorities that are more closely aligned with emergency services. The affect will be to drive down the funder’s giving to youth-related activities
d) Adding new giving priorities that will drive down the funders giving to youth-related activities (mostly to emergency related activities)
Of the remaining 17 funders,
a) 4 funders say they will increase youth related funding, especially for direct services to youth, such as homelessness, family services, crisis services
b) 13 funders have no plans to shift their funding priorities in the short-term
Since government funding and general foundation/corporate giving are also declining, funding for youth agencies will take a double funding hit this year and perhaps into next year as well.
It would be interesting to determine some of the short and long term social and economic effects of cuts to out-of-school time programs, mentoring programs, recreation programs, and non-academic education programs, such as job readiness, literacy, and business skills.
Individual Donor Patterns Related to institutional survey, we have recently been informally tracking individual donor giving changes and expectations for the coming year.
Of the 40+ individual Minnesota donors with whom we have had informal conversations, more than half changed their giving patterns at the end of 2008 and anticipate retaining these changes for the foreseeable future.
(It should be noted that more than 35 of the 40+ individuals and families are directly related to or two-degrees of separation from Minnesota nonprofits)
Recognizing that this is a simple, non-scientific sampling, here are some interesting patterns:
a) More than two-thirds intend to reduce giving to various types of alma mater(s), including colleges, high schools, scouting programs, performing arts, and other programs in which they or their children formerly participated
b) Most anticipated reducing their giving to their non-top line environment and health charities. That is, if the cause was not traditionally among their top 5-10 favorite charities, they anticipated not contributing this year.
c) Among these donors, international organizations will also take a hit. Many (more than half) anticipate reducing or eliminating their international development, relief or public policy gifts this year. We could not discern a specific pattern for these decisions, just a general sense that other things – closer to home – were more important
d) Arts organizations, on the other hand seemed to fare better. Many of our surveyed individual donors said they would retain their giving to arts organizations. For some it is a matter of a multi-year commitment, for others a sense most other donors will be reducing their gifts to local arts institutions.
e) Finally, many donors spent plenty of personal time at the end of last year looking for good emergency service agencies to fund for the coming years. We received plenty of inquiries about Catholic Charities, individual homeless shelters and feeding programs.
Interestingly, many programs that also provide emergency services, such as domestic violence programs, legal aid, health clinics, and emergency family services, were not on the emergency services radar for the individual donors.
The Upshot: Perhaps Bette Davis/Margo Channing said it best: “Fasten your seatbelts. It is going to be a bumpy night.”
Access Philanthropy will not publish a detailed report on either of these surveys, nor do we release the names of surveyed institutions or donors. However, if you are interested in more information, please feel free to write us at 4info@accessphilanthropy.com.
Madoff Scandal Rocks PhilanthropyThe Madoff Scandal Rocks Institutional Philanthropy
Update December 20, 2008: The Palm Beach-based Picower Foundation announced today that it is closing its doors permanently due to losses related to the Madoff scandal. The medical research funder reported $995 million in investment assets on its most recent IRS 990PF.
December 15, 2008 -- The Madoff investment scandal has rocked the foundation world. Overall, commercial, individual and institutional investors had at least $50 billion in funds overseen by Bernard Madoff, the money manager arrested last week in an alleged fraud. According to Madoff, his firm was "a giant Ponzi scheme."
According to 2007 990PFs, at least 90 private foundations had Madoff related investments and stand to lose a large share, and in some cases all of their funds.
While 46 of the Madoff-related foundations are located in New York State, foundations in twelve states also had Madoff investments. After New York, foundations in Florida (15 foundations), New Jersey (8), Massachusetts (8) and Minnesota (4) stood the lose the most.
At least three foundations – JEHT, Chais Family and Lappin Charitable Foundations will be closing their doors forever due to Madoff related losses. On the other hand, many foundations had less than $40,000 invested in the Madoff instruments, and will be only marginally impacted by the losses.
Here are a few of the foundations with Madoff investments, where the foundation is located and how much they reported giving last year
Angel Family Foundation, Albany, NY: $188,000
Robert M. Beren Foundation, Wichita, KS: $3 million
Chais Family Foundation, Encino CA: $8 million
Susan and Steven Fiterman, Minneapolis: $98,000
Gottesman Family Foundation, DC: $15.8 million
Gurwin Foundation, Rockville Centre, NY: $1.2 million
HSBC Bank USA, N.A. Corporate Giving Program: Unknown
JEHT Foundation, New York: $26 million
Kozloff Foundation, Wyomissing, PA: $282,000
Robert I. Lappin Charitable Foundation, Salem, MA: $165,000
Lautenberg Foundation, Cliffside Park, NJ: $389,000
Julian J. Leavitt Family Charitable Trust, Georgetown, TX: $294,000
Los Angeles Jewish Community Foundation: $44 million
Madoff Family Foundation, New York: $95,000
MBZ Charitable Trust (Mort Zuckerman), New York: Unknown
Charles and Candice Nadler, Excelsior, MN: $58,000
Caroline and Sigmund Schott, Cambridge, MA: $422,000
Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family Foundation, Boston: $12 million
Albert and Lillian Small Foundation, Bethesda, MD: $778,000
Sperry Fund, New York: $717,000
Wunderkinder Foundation (Stephen Speilberg), Los Angeles: Unknown
For our most recent profile of the JEHT Foundation click here.
The The Grantmaker Do Not Call List
November 14, 2008 Here is the latest list of troubled corporate giving programs and foundations who are facing major changes due to the recent financial crises. Today, we added news about automakers, retailers, insurance companies, and a couple more banks.
Unless you have a strong history with these folks or plenty of time on your hands to pursue extremely longshot prospects, it is better to spend time on other prospects:
1) AIG -- federal government is taking over. In 2006, more than 2000 foundations had investment or insurance relationships with AIG.
2) CV Starr Foundation -- a private foundation that serves as a giving instrument for AIG
2) Washington Mutual -- federal government and JP MorganChase are taking over. In 2006, 3400 private foundations had accounts Washington Mutual
3) Wachovia -- Wells Fargo is taking over operations. During 2006 more than 5000 private foundations had accounts with Wachovia Banks or Wachovia Securities.
4) Lehman Brothers -- filed bankruptcy -- the federal government will assume responsibility until the assets are taken over by Bain Capital and Hellman & Friedman During 2006, more than 3500 private foundations had accounts with Lehman Brothers
5) Merrill Lynch -- Bank of America is taking over. During 2006 more than 5000 private foundations had accounts with Merrill Lynch.
6) Countrywide Financial -- Bank of America has taken over. In 2006 more than 1100 private foundations held stock in Countrywide Financials.
7) Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs -- undergoing reorganization
8) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- federal government is assuming full responsibility.
9) Bear Stearns -- JP MorganChase has taken over. In 2006 more than 2600 private foundations had accounts with Bear Stearns.
10) National City has been taken over by PNC. However, PNC announced that NC Fiinancial Foundation will be awarding $28 million in 2009, $5 million more than in 2008. Current grantees will receive the same amount as in 2008, Grantees receiving gifts from both PNC and National City will be receiving only one gift in 2009.
11) Big box retailers, especially Macys, Best Buy, and Target Stores are projecting miserable sales figures for the holiday season. There will be ramifications for their grantmaking programs. However, the bad news will probably wait until the end of the first quarter of next year.
12) American Express, Hartford Insurance, CIT Group, and Lincoln Financial Group are purchasing banks or S&Ls so they acquire "bank holding company" status, which, in turn, will allow these companies to receive federal bailout money. Not such a good sign for those looking for philanthropic support from their foundations.
13) Both Ford Motor Company Fund and General Motors Foundation have announced another round of philanthropy budget cuts. Ford Motor, which was awarding more than $200 million in direct and indirect grants just two years ago, expects to award less than $10 million this year, with grants going only to internal and business-related awardees (e.g., emergency assistance for laid-off employees). Yet, some auto company plants (e.g., the Kansas City Ford plant) are still making small grants to local charities.
No word yet from the Japanese or European automakers regarding the future of their giving programs.
14) If you are still writing proposals to banks, you might want to reconsider how much time you invest in Deutsche Bank. The FDIC puts them high on the "Watch List"
15) On the other hand -- Bank of America, Wells Fargo,JP MorganBhase and Citi are all buying up riskier assets at extremely discounted rates and counting on the federal government to cover these risks if necessary. Although they are purchasing new banks, Citi announced that it is laying off another 10,000 employees. Not necessarily a sign of financial instability, but typically a precursor to philanthropy cuts.
While many financial institutions are closing or putting their giving programs on hold, many banks and insurance companies rely corporate giving to meet federal Community Reinvestment Administration standards and other federal and local government regulations. Furthermore, several major banks, such as Bank of America report that corporate giving actually does increase the number of customers and business for their companies.
Shifts in Regional GivingJune 2008: Shifts in Regional Institutional Philanthropy
According to the Foundation Center, regional institutional philanthropy is shifting. As it shrinks in the Midwest, funding interests are changing, appearing more and more self-focused. As it shifts in other regions, there is reason to be concerned about the future of funding for organizations in both the Midwest and the South
The New York-based Foundation Center is THE data center for institutional philanthropy in America. With giving records on more than 80,000 independent, corporate, operating, and public grantmaking operations, the FC is the foremost research publication center for US institutional philanthropy. When FC publishes, everyone (including old responsive philanthropy skeptics) take note.
Every year the Foundation Center publishes a national institutional giving trends report that includes a regional analysis of giving within four areas: Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, and West. The Northeast region includes the New York City, Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC, where nearly two-thirds of all US foundation endowments are based.
The West includes everything west of Nebraska, including all of Denver, California, Washington State, Oregon, Dallas, Houston, and the emerging high-growth institutional philanthropy areas of Arizona and New Mexico.
The Southeast has traditionally been the smallest philanthropy area, but recent corporate grantmaking growth in North Carolina, Atlanta, and private foundation growth on both Florida coasts (where snow birds from the Midwest have been transferring funding interests and grants) have boosted grantmaking in that region.
That leaves the Midwest. The Midwest is home to the Michigan Triplets (Kresge, Mott, and Kellogg). However, the Midwest also includes the rust belt states of Ohio, Illinois, and Michigan that were once home to America’s finest corporate donors, including generous automakers, banks, insurance companies, and big box retailers.
However, mergers, financial downturns, and market shifts have dramatically decreased giving from these companies. For example, in 2000, the combined giving of Ford Motor, Chrysler, and General Motors foundations was nearly $600 million, but in 2007, less than $90 million.
According to the Foundation Center, Southeastern and Northeastern institutional philanthropy has grown by around 10% during the last five reporting years, from $3 billion to $3.3 billion in the Southeast and from $5.3 to $5.8 in the Northeast. In the West, institutional philanthropy has grown from $3.7 billion in 2002 to $6.1 billion in the last reporting year. On the other hand, Midwest institutional philanthropy has not changed in the last five years, staying at $3.7 billion since 2002.
The Upshot:There are two significant effects from these regional shifts.
As institutional philanthropy shrinks in proportion to national grantmaking and shrinks in the face of inflation and government cutbacks, the Midwest region’s overall giving patterns reflect a more internally focused, more traditional giving. Immediate, local needs and perspectives have become more important. Interest areas that reflect a more global or long-term perspectives take a backseat.
For example, the proportion of Midwest grantmaking for local interests such as human services, philanthropy/ volunteerism (primarily United Way) and religion have grown during the last five years. No other region awards as much for these three areas as grantmakers in the Midwest.
On the other hand, Midwest grantmaking for national and international interests, such as the environment, international affairs, medical/health research and social sciences have decreased or remained static during the last five years.
In the high-growth Western region, and the Southeast and the Northeast, grantmaking for wider view issues such as, medical research, the environment, and international affairs has either grown substantially or skyrocketed during the last five years.
Do these grantmaking patterns support stereotypes about the Midwest mixture of Lake Woebegon-esque values and Grant Woods style isolationism? Maybe, but probably not. Perhaps these patterns more readily reflect Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in which human beings must address physiological deficiencies before addressing issues in their external environment. If that is the case, perhaps, Midwestern grantmakers are closer to the harsh realities that beset their immediate constituents and communities than funders in the West or Northeast.
Place-Based Funding – The Other Impact: Northeast and Western funders award larger proportions of funding to international causes. At the same time, geographic proximity remains a major determinant in grantmaking. Hometown giving remains in the 50% range for corporate foundations and in the 25% to 30% range for most major independent foundations.
Why is this of concern? Well, the gap between Northeastern and Western funders and Midwestern and Southeastern funders continues to grow. For example, according to the Foundation Center, 649 Midwestern state funders specifically target New York State as a grantmaking priority. On the other hand, just 327 Northeastern funders specifically target any of the Midwestern states as a grantmaking priority. This discrepancy of 322 funders has increased from a 232-funder discrepancy just three years ago.
If these three patterns continue -- the gap in geographic priorities, the increases in international funding, and the continued focus on hometown giving, and there is no reason to believe otherwise, we can anticipate declines in grantmaking from Western and Northeastern foundations to Midwestern and the Southeastern organizations.
If so, the rust belt will become a little rustier and beautiful Lake Woebegon may need a major financial investment to avoid becoming a ghost town.
To review the Foundation Center’s most recent trends report, paste this address into your browser http://foundationcenter.org/gainknowledge/research/nationaltrends.html;jsessionid=BFNY0AMVPJTXNLAQBQ4CGW15AAAACI2F#other.
Mary Poppins and George Bailey on Banks and their PhilanthropyJanuary 23, 2008: Mary Poppins and George Bailey on Banking Philanthropy
The other day a business reporter asked why we thought the banking industry’s economic downturn would affect more than just housing and community development organizations.
For a few banks whose philanthropy and community involvement are specifically focused on these interest areas, it’s true that housing and economic development groups will be hurt by the industry’s financial slump and the resulting downturn in philanthropy within those specific banks.
However, in most major banks, such as Bank of America, Washington Mutual, Citi, National City, Wells Fargo and U.S. Bancorp – the downturn will mean more bad times for arts and education organizations than for housing and community development groups.
It’s a mistake to assume that banking-related philanthropy is primarily focused on housing and economic development, and a worse mistake to assume that housing and economic development are the primary business of banking.
Let's go back to Mary Poppins’ field trip to the Dawes, Tomes, Mousely, Grubbs Fidelity Fiduciary Bank – “You'll be part of Railways through Africa, Dams across the Nile, Fleets of ocean greyhounds, Majestic, self-amortizing canals, Plantations of ripening tea”.
Now it is true that many banks, especially smaller, locally based institutions, invest heavily in housing projects and business development. However, most larger commercial banks invest heavily in all kinds of things that don’t have anything to do with housing or community businesses – mega-construction, transportation, pharmaceuticals, agriculture, energy, and other banks, just to name a few.
Okay, so banks are investing in many things besides housing and economic development.
So what?
Banks take in dollars (or tuppence) through deposits, loan interest, and other financial instruments to support their investments. While much of banks’ investable funds are derived from major customers and returns on investments, a very large portion comes from small depositors, including local employees, businesses, nonprofit groups, and government agencies.
We depositors like our banks to give something back to our community. In fact, we like it so much that we passed a federal law in 1976, the Community Reinvestment Act that requires banks to give back to the community – through loans, employee volunteers, and mostly through philanthropy and sponsorships.
So banks have to give something back – some of their philanthropy goes to housing and economic development transactions. However, even more of banking philanthropy is invested in institutions like schools, arts organizations, United Way, community events and civic ventures.
With the exception of Wells Fargo’s housing philanthropy and Comerica’s community development philanthropy, every major bank in America awards more charitable giving to education, the arts and United Way than to housing and community development organizations. It is true. Check the giving figures at the Foundation Center Online Directory.
Why more to education and the arts? We have two theories.
First, “The Retailer Theory”. Almost every major retailer – clothing, fast food, sports equipment, drugstores – award most of their philanthropy to local charities that are safe, respectable and family-oriented. For example, Macy’s says they like to give grants to institutions that their target market --adolescent and teen girls --understand and want to support. Look at their grants list. You will rarely find large, complex enterprises like medical research (except for AIDS and children’s cancer).
As retailers, commercial banks must also cater to their target markets, their neighbors, and their neighbors’ employers. Education and arts are great, visible, popular community causes that people understand (unlike housing and business investments) and solidly support. So why not support the most popular causes in town?
Second, “The Lots of Small is Good Theory.” The average grant from the banking industry has traditionally been much smaller than the average grant from other corporate sectors. For example, 3-4 years ago, the auto industry’s average grant was five times larger than the average banking industry grant.
Banks have to give away smaller grants because everyone needs to get a piece of the bank philanthropy pie – it would be terrible to lose a depositor over a $1000 gift.
So if they have to give away smaller grants, why not give to organizations where a small grant will make a significant difference, rather than a huge institution (i.e., medical research, universities) where a four-figure grant can get lost? That is not to say banks do not make grants to large institutions, but they tend to be local institutions, rather than national behemoths.
Therefore, many organizations have something to lose when banking philanthropy suffers.
However, and here is final and probably most interesting point. Most major banks will never say that their philanthropy has, or soon will take a nosedive. Even in the midst of the post 9/11 recession, major banks were telling us their philanthropy was “stable”. Even when CEOs are being fired and the Fed is lowering interest rates, banks are telling us that "2008 philanthropy levels are consistent with 2007 levels.”
How can this be? How can projected giving levels remain the same when actual giving levels are declining? Don’t banks know how to do financial projections? Don’t they know about budgeting?
Of course they do, however, banks rarely announce that giving is down for two reasons:
First, -- to use another fictional financial institution -- remember what happened to the Bailey Building and Loan Association in “It’s a Wonderful Life” when word got out that there were financial problems at George Bailey’s little S&L? A run on the bank! A panic that no bank – real or fictional – is remotely willing to risk with publicly disclosed bad financial news.
Second -- back to the depositors. As we said earlier, we like our banks to support our community, and we're no dummies about banks and profits. We know many bank CEOs are earning seven-figure salaries, and we know someone is making lots of money from our 2% savings accounts. A bank’s withdrawal of financial support from our community may be just the inspiration we need to switch our account from Wells Fargo to that new little bank opening across from our local grocery store.
People do change banks for such reasons and in the banking industry, that’s so scary that when Washington Mutual, the nation’s largest savings and loan actually announced this week that it was decreasing its philanthropy for 2008, it made headline news in at least five business journals from coast (Seattle) to coast (Tampa Bay).
So if they don’t want to admit they are giving less this year than they gave the prior year, what do banks do to hide the philanthropy downturns?
Simple, rather than announcing a decrease in giving, they add a source of giving. For example, when one Boston bank was forced to reduce their philanthropy during the downturn of the late 1980s’, they didn’t tell anyone they were downsizing. Instead, they added the dollar amount of their employees’ United Way donations to their published giving totals, something they had never done before. This had the effect of nearly doubling their published philanthropy totals, in spite of the fact that the bank’s corporate giving program actually gave away millions less than the prior year.
There are plenty of unpublished generosities in any major company – in-kind contributions, employee giving, employee volunteer hours, local giving, and even discarded goods that are used by “backdoor charities”. Adding those sources to the company's giving total may be slightly questionable, but probably not unethical. Moreover, if it keeps us from shifting our accounts to other, less generous, but more cunning banks (e.g., Dawes, Tomes, Mousely, Grubbs), then perhaps it’s not that bad.
Bank of America Posts Major Income DropBank of America Posts Income Drop
October 18, 2007: We're not in the habit of posting business losses and upswings on this webpage, but Bank of America, the second largest bank in the US, and one of the most capable and generous corporate givers in the US, recently posted a 32% drop in quarterly earnings and reported that credit-loss provisions nearly doubled from last year to this year.
What will this mean for the bank's corporate and foundation giving? The real answer: We don't know for sure.
But we do know something about the business side effects. Typically, losses of this size send tremors throughout the bank (or any major business entity) that affects everyone from the CEO to vendors to tellers.
Since loss reports like this negatively effect the company's stock value and since a CEO's business value is generally tied to the company's share price, this news will make Bank of America CEO and Chair Kenneth Lewis very squeamish. And in major corporations, when the CEO ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.
Expansions that aren't already in deep in the pipeline will stall or be pulled back for several years. Entry into new markets will be delayed or cut back in scale, and any new initiatives -- no matter where in the bank -- that are not directly related to sales, will be stopped, sliced or just put on hold for the time being.
The Philanthropy Angle The Bank of America Foundation is partially endowed ($41 million in assets, $103 million in giving during the last reporting period), so standing grants, and regular grants probably won't be substantially effected.
However, new grants, increases in standing grants, and philanthropic expansions into new markets will probably be put on hold. After all, it looks bad to employees when companies increase giving, but curtail raises and bonuses.
The Good News. Although it's late in the day, this may be the time to approach Bank of America's various marketing and sponsorship departments.
In manufacturing, a downturn generally results in cutting back the production staff and increasing the sales staff. Although banks haven't quite picked up on this equation yet, most bank managers do know that it behooves them to increase sales (new deposits, new loans etc).
If you have a REAL opportunity to increase exposure and sales for Bank of America, this is the time to pitch it to the bank manager or local marketing folks. But you might want to slip that request for an increased annual giving amount back in your bottom desk drawer for now.
Carnegie Corporation Realigns... AgainCarnegie Corporation Realigns... Again
October, 2007…The venerable Carnegie Corporation of New York announced that it is shifting its funding areas again, the fourth configuration in seven years. While the changes are primarily in how the foundation organizes its work and staff responsibilities, a few funding areas from the past will be eliminated and others will be down-graded to “other interests.”
Since its last major realignment in 2002, the Corporation has had six primary interests areas: 1) Education (especially higher education, adolescent literacy and urban education reform), 2) International Development (especially in Sub-Sahara Africa), 3) International Peace and Security (especially nuclear/biological weapons and US-Russian cooperation, 4) Strengthening US Democracy (especially nonprofit development, voting rights, civil rights and campaign finance reform), 5) Carnegie Scholars (especially new academics specializing in Islamic studies) and 6) Strengthening African Universities.
The Corporation’s new interests will be simplified into two areas: 1) International and 2) National.
According to the Corporation’s press release “International Program grants will focus on reducing direct threats to international peace and security while also investing in international development by supporting institutions and individuals in sub-Saharan Africa and Eurasia, two regions of long-standing Corporation involvement”.
The fund will end its support for nonproliferation efforts for biological weapons and Russian higher education. One new area the foundation plans to support in a larger way is efforts to understand the Islamic religion, Muslim nations, and American Muslims.
On the other side, “The National Program will support the revitalization of democracy by funding new pathways both to educational and economic opportunity; and to citizenship, civic participation and integration in a pluralistic society. The Fund will focus on integrating immigrants into U.S. culture and society.”
However, the Corporation will end its program in campaign finance reform and will refocus its program in adolescent literacy.
The Corporation is also adding a new initiative in journalism education “to help reporters build specialized expertise that will enhance coverage of complex subjects, understand the languages and cultures of distant parts of the world and appreciate the ethical dimensions of their work.”
Carnegie is also adding a new position to its staff ”to manage the foundation's continuous assessment of its programs and to further instill a culture of accountability across the organization.”. In other words, ongoing program and interest area changes will be the full-time job of one of the Corporation’s senior officers.
This is the third major realignment in seven years for Carnegie. The Corporation announced major program changes in 1999, and then again just prior to the September 11, 2001 catastrophe. After 9-11, the Corporation discarded its 2001 initiative plans and established a new set of initiatives, developing more focus on the Islamic world and on international security.
During the last five years, the grantmaker’s initiatives have remained fairly stable with some interesting new initiatives in U.S. nonprofit infrastructure, especially in the areas of increasing nonprofit accountability, transparency, and coalition-building.
The Big Picture: Foundation program, procedure, and interest area changes are a constant in the grantmaking world. During tough economic times, endowed grantmakers must realign their priorities to shelter their long-term partnerships and at the same time, address the economic fallout on economically and socially disadvantaged people.
During strong economic times, foundations take the opportunity to experiment with new funding strategies, incorporate new grantmaking procedures, and incorporate new funding priorities.
Because of changes in corporate management, business interests, business structures, and a corporate model that encourages rapid changes in unsuccessful ventures; corporate grantmaking is even more prone to shifting grantmaking initiatives than private independent foundations.
Since both corporate and independent grantmakers are supposed to be on the research and development end of their respective fields, experimenting with new solutions, creating new partnerships, and mounting new grantmaking procedures are typically welcomed by other foundations and foundation observers.
However, for some grantseekers, especially those without the financial or personnel resources to quickly shift their program areas or development areas to address grantmakers’ new interests and procedures, grantmakers’ changes can be fatiguing, and sometimes detrimental to long-standing program interests.
Whether a necessary evil or a sign of a healthy industry, grantmaking changes are a constant.
Trendspotting: The Carnegie changes are by no means unique. Both the Rockefeller and Gates foundations also shifted program areas during the past year and the Ford Foundation's new CEO is expected to announce major changes at his foundation by the end of 2008.
Helen Walton Dies, Leaving $16 billion to Walton Family FoundationApril 30 2007 -- Helen Walton dies, leaving an anticipated $16 billion to the Walton Family Foundation
With this anticipated gift, the Walton Family Foundation will have more than $18 billion in assets and become the second largest foundation in America.
Helen Walton Dies, Leaving $16 billion to Walton Family FoundationApril 30 2007 -- Helen Walton dies, leaving an anticipated $16 billion to the Walton Family Foundation
Sixty-five years ago, Sam and Helen Walton met in a bowling alley in Claremore, Oklahoma; a few months later, they were married -- on Valentine’s Day in 1943. Sam, the founder of the Wal-Mart empire died fifteen years ago and last week, Helen died, leaving behind $16.4 billion gift to the Walton Family Foundation that may forever change Arkansas and public education in America.
With this anticipated gift, the Walton Family Foundation will have more than $18 billion in assets and become the second largest foundation in America, well behind the $60 billion in assets held by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; slightly ahead of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s $16 billion in assets; and well ahead of the Ford Foundation’s $12 billion; and the Getty Trust, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Shriners Hospital Trust’s $10 billion in assets.
Currently the foundation annually awards nearly 1,000 grants worth $158 million, three fourths of which is directed to education and education reform. Nearly one-fourth goes directly to K-12 schools (mostly charter and private schools); one-fourth to colleges and scholarship programs; and one-fourth to a variety of school reform programs, such as school choice and school voucher programs, public policy institutes (e.g., Manhattan Institute and the Goldwater Institute), and other K-12 reform programs, such as American Education Reform Council, the Center for Education Reform, Children's Scholarship Fund, Colorado League of Charter Schools, and the Florida School Choice Fund.
Helen and Sam’s surviving children, Rob, Alice, and Jim (John died in an airplane crash a couple years back) will have control of the foundation and could alter the grantmaking focus of the Walton Family Foundation. Some heirs of wealthy foundation founders do -- for example, the Annenberg, Koret, and James R. Thorpe foundations.
Odds are the Walton heirs will continue their parents’ legacy of supporting college scholarship programs, environmental efforts, mainstream charities in the Arkansas/ Mississippi Delta area, and most significantly, support for public education “reform.”
However, even before their mother's death, the heirs were moving the foundation in a different direction – they are much more nationally-focused and much more politically oriented than their parents. While Sam and Helen believed in the value of competition, school choice and no unions, most of their personal philanthropy was focused on civic life in Arkansas, Texas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and other southeastern states.
Once the children became actively involved in the Foundation's during the early 1990s, the foundation moved dramatically towards a national school reform agenda. Currently, the foundation awards only 25% of funding in Arkansas, but millions to national policy centers and to states where the charter school movement is healthy and supported by state government, such as Minnesota and Colorado.
According to some foundation observers, the Foundation is interested in charter schools because it owns nearly 250,000 shares in Tesseract, a for-profit charter school development corporation. Others believe the commitment to charter schools is part of a long-term strategy to break unions, especially teachers and other public service employee unions.
Still others believe the foundation’s public school reform agenda is simply an extension of Sam Walton’s small town upbringing and his belief that competition works well as a tool of reform, including reform of public education.
Under Helen’s leadership, the foundation’s grants pool remained diverse. In addition to hundreds of “school reform” groups, the foundation also awards several grants to public schools, African American and Hispanic schools, and public school support organizations. The foundation also awards many grants for non-education groups; such as Planned Parenthood, heart and cancer groups, national youth groups, national social service organizations, arts centers, and a few local environment groups.
These smaller grantmaking objectives will probably remain largely intact. The heirs and their children still have a strong commitment to the region and to its civic life. There may be a few shifts and certainly, there will be more money, so there will be more grantees in a much larger giving area (maybe national?).
Will we see more money going to charter schools and the school reform movement? Walton-friendly foundations and policy institutes are already ramping up for a much greater assault on public schools. One think tank representative says her group is rolling out its old school reform plans, including state legislative reforms, research agendas, and media blitzes. They are counting on the Walton heirs to continue and grow the school reform agenda.
For a current profile of the the Walton Family Foundation click here.
Carnegie Corporation Names Two Ex-Governors as Chair and Vice-ChairCARNEGIE CORPORATION NAMES THOMAS KEAN AND RICHARD RILEY TO BOARD CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR
March 23, 2007 -- The New York-based foundation, one of the ten largest in the US, recently elected two former governors to chair and vice-chair the board of directors. Former NJ Governor Thomas Kean will chair the board, and Former South Carolina Governor Richard Riley will serve as vice-chair. Both have strong education backgrounds, Kean as president of Drew University and a Presidential Education Policy Advisory Committee; Riley as former Secretary of Education in the Clinton Administration. Recently, Kean has been visible as the chair of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks.
For a current profile of the Carnegie Corporation click here.
Vira and Howard Heinz Endowments MergeMarch 21, 2007 Howard and Vira Heinz Foundations Merge -- Down to 56 Varieties of Heinz Philanthropy
The Pittsburgh-based Vira Heinz Endowment and the Howard Heinz Endowment announced that they would merge all of their operations.
Until the announcement there were six major Heinz-named philanthropies. The Vira, the Howard, the Company Foundation, the Corporate Contrributions Program, the Heinz Family Foundation and the Drue Heinz Foundation. Additionally, the family has several donor-advised funds in several public and community foundations, including the Tides Foundation in San Francisco and the Boston Foundation. Several family members have smaller philanthropies and operating foundations scattered across the country.
This is the second major shift involving Heinz philanthropies in the past year.
First, the HJ Heinz Company Foundation assumed primary responsiblitiy for company-related giving. In the past the Foundation was smaller than the Company Contributions program and was primarily giving in the Pittsburgh area. Although the unendowed foundation continues to focus on Pittsburgh, employee matching gifts and international relief, the foundation has tripled its giving capacity in the last two years. The HJ Heinz Corporate Contributions Program continues to give to a wider variety of interest and in a more geographically diverse area, but is now smaller and less valued by corporate officials.
Secondly, in the last week, the directors of the Howard Heinz Endowment and the Vira I. Heinz Endowment decided to create a single group -- The Heinz Endowments -- governed by a single board. Leading that board is Teresa Heinz, wife of Sen. John Kerry and widow of the late Sen. John Heinz.
According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: With $1.4 billion in (combined) assets, the Heinz Endowments is now one of the 50 largest foundations in the United States... Handing out an average of $60 million a year in grants, it remains a key source of support for countless nonprofit organizations that depend on Heinz's money to fund arts, education, economic development, children and family programs.
The two endowments shared some staff, several administrative functions and offices, but had a few different program staff and some differences in their giving interests. With the merger, the two foundations will now focus on three Pittsburgh concerns: (a) Reform of the Pittsburgh Public Schools; (b) Downtown Pittsburgh's real estate development; and (c) "Green" technology, architecture and economic development.
For a current profile of the Howard Heinz Foundationclick here.
For a current profile of the Heinz Family Foundationclick here.
For a current profile of the Vira Heinz Endowment click here.
For a current profile of the HJ Heinz Company Foundationclick here.
St Paul Travelers & Federated Dept Stores Change NamesChanging Names
March 2007 Last year, when SBC purchased AT&T, the larger company also took over the smaller company’s name. The reason was obvious -- everyone knows and generally respects, AT&T, but only their customers know SBC.
In recent years, several other companies have gone through similar name changes, especially in the banking and retail industries -- Wachovia, Bank of America, US Bank, Wells Fargo, Target/Dayton Hudson, and Kmart.
This year two of the oldest and most well respected corporations and their foundations will also be taking the names of their smaller, acquired companies.
Minnesota-based Saint Paul Travelers is one of the oldest and most respected insurance companies in North America. A few years ago, “The Saint Paul” (as Saint Paulites knew it) purchased the Connecticut-based Travelers Property & Casualty Corp., a remnant of Travelers Insurance that had merged with Citibank in1998. When Citigroup spun off Travelers Property & Casualty Corp. in 2002, St. Paul Companies picked it up and christened the parent company St. Paul Travelers. Recently, the company announced it would henceforth be just Travelers Company.
Cincinnati-based Federated Department Stores, another revered company is the largest chain of department stores in America, having purchased among others, Bloomingdales, Filenes’s, Marshall Fields, Dayton Department Stores, May Department Stores and Macy’s (east, south, and west and wherever). Recently, the company announced that it would be changing the parent company name to Macy's. Most of the corporate department store divisions will keep their current names.
Along with their parent companies, both corporate foundations will also change names -- to Travelers Foundation and Macy’s Foundation.
Why do companies change their names? There are hundreds of reasons for changing names (including geographical diversification and economies of scale). However, both St. Paul Travelers and Federated Department Stores changed for for the most common reason, “branding” -- a desire to become better known through the purchase of a well known brand name.
Both St. Paul Travelers and Federated Department Stores are relying on increased name recognition to amplify consumer interest, increase stockholder respect, and generate employee enthusiasm (huge, employee pep rallies usually accompany a name change).
The St. Paul Companies name is hardly known outside of it headquarters city. However, everyone (at least those of us born before 1998) can remember Traveler’s and its famous little red umbrella.
Similarly, hardly anyone outside of Southwestern Ohio remembers the Federated name, but Macy’s is a bedrock part of American culture—the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, the Miracle on 34th Street, and the basic business axiom “Does Macys tell Gimbels?”
The Philanthropy Side What happens to philanthropy when the company name changes? Some companies use their philanthropy to support their new branding efforts –
For example, hoping to renew community goodwill in its hometown Minneapolis, as soon as Target Corporation purchased Marshall Fields, the parent company made an ill-conceived, but very quick million dollar donation in the name of the newly acquired company.
Whenever Wachovia Bank buys a regional bank, the company typically makes a whopping contribution to the local zoo, children’s museum, or other popular public charity.
Kmart announced its re-commitment to Sears' American Dream program at the same time it announced its take-over.
Federated Department Stores has already begun this process by rebranding some of its regional giving and corporate sponsorship programs with the Macy's name -- such as Macy’s Gives and Macy’s Reads. The seven regional divisions of Macy’s are expected to eventually take over charitable giving for all of the old Federated divisions (such as Bloomingdales).
Federated has already transitioned some of its philanthropy to a more brand-oriented giving. Sponsored programs (reading, school readiness, environment, Christmas gifts) are consuming more corporate philanthropic dollars and corporate marketing attention.
In the future, giving to lesser-known arts groups, education groups, and local organizations will probably decrease, as will the average grant size. Because United Way is not the branding opportunity it used to be, they should expect slightly smaller grants, less participation, and drastic cuts in some smaller communities.
On the other hand, St. Paul Companies/Travelers will immediately begin using the Travelers Foundation name for its national philanthropic program and the Travelers Connecticut name for its Connecticut-based giving. But overall, neither Travelers philanthropic programs or priorities will change much.
There are no anticipated changes in personnel. Both companies' foundations are directed by well-respected veterans, Mary Pickard of the new Travelers Foundation and Dixie Barker of the new Macy's Foundation.
For a current profile of the St Paul Travelers Foundationclick here.
For a current profile of the Federated Department Stores Foundationclick here.
For a current profile of the Macy's North Giving Programclick here.
Altria-Kraft Break Up May End Arts GrantsAltria-Kraft Break Up May End Arts Grants
January 5 2007: The Altria conglomerate which includes Kraft Foods, Ritz, Planters, Jell-O, Altoids, Parkay, Oscar Mayer, Kool Aid, hundreds of other food companies, and several cigarette companies has decided to split its food operations from its tobacco operations to protect Kraft and other food subsidiaries from the myriad of tobacco-related lawsuits Altria faces every year.
The breakup, which will begin in February is expected to greatly reduce the company’s traditional support for dance, theatre, museums and other cultural organizations. The breakup will result in a major reduction of Altria’s overall philanthropy. “We anticipate that our program will be significantly reduced in 2008,” says Jennifer Goodale, the vice president in charge of contributions at Altria.
As of 1/5/07, the webpage has no news about the coming changes. However, letters to arts grant recipients alerting them about the changes have already been sent. No news yet about the company's hunger, domestic violence and humanitarian aid interest areas. But it's safe to assume the new Kraft corporation will assume total responsiblity for hunger and domestic violence initiatives.
For a current profile of the Altria Corporate Giving Program click here.
OnPhilanthropy's 2006 Top Ten Philanthropy Stories One of our favorite philanthropy blogs is onPhilanthropy(http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/PageServer). Here are onPhilanthropy's Top 10 Philanthropy Stories of 2006 along with links to OnPhilanthropy's original accompanying stories. Some worthwhile, but lighter reading material while on holiday break.
1. Warren Buffett
Back in June, we wrote this line: "If you were looking for the starting line in the super-hyped 'transfer of wealth' between one generation and the next and its direct implications for American philanthropy all you had to do was listen to Warren Buffett today." And that lead holds up. The mega-investor's mega-gift is a no-brainer as story of the year.
Buffett's commitment of $37 billion to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest gift ever, and a clear, brilliantly-lit marker on the philanthropy landscape - both an inspiration and a challenge to two different generations of Americans. It also raised questions of scale, of governance, and of effectiveness. As our own Dr. Susan Raymond wrote:
"You face both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is that, in 40 years, governments of the industrialized world have spent $2.3 trillion on foreign assistance. Most recent studies have shown no relationship between that expenditure and real economic growth or self-reliance. The opportunity is to show that private philanthropy can do a better job."
Transfer of Wealth Begins With Hand-off From Buffett to Gates
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6605
2. Clinton Global Initiative
In only two years, former President Bill Clinton's CGI has become the go-to conference for real change and cross-sector cooperation. More than 55 former or current heads of state, First Lady Laura Bush, and a who's who of philanthropists gathered for three days of peace, love, and understanding in New York - and CGI came away with more than $7 billion in commitments to change the world. More than one analyst commented that CGI has become a government-in-exile - both in terms of the U.S. Presidency and the United Nations. The big question: how the commitments will really work in the out years.
Clinton Global Initiative Special Report
http://flip.onphilanthropy.com/news_
onphilanthropy/clinton_global_initiative/index.html
3. Google
What to make of the emergence of Google.org as a for-profit philanthropy? Hard to say - and it may be hard to say for quite a few years. Nonetheless, Google's hard charge into philanthropy and its dominance of new media makes this a very big story indeed. As Dr. Raymond remarked: "How is this “philanthropy?” The end is socially driven, but the means are the beauty of capitalism carried out largely in the marketplace. Clearly, The End of Definitions is upon us. This is a good thing. Change reflects the adjustment of institutions and intellects to the realities of life."
Google's Philanthropy: The End of Definitions
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6731
4. Richard Branson
The book-end to Google's "philanthropy" was Sir Richard Branson's "giving," which he announced at the Clinton confab. All the profits from Virgin's transport businesses will be ploughed back into developing alternative fuels; much of the funding will go to for-profit companies, some owned by Branson. Yet, he could just put the profits into his pocket. Again, "philanthropy?" Who knows. Philanthropic? Yes. Effective? Time will tell. We'll be watching.
Virgin and Google: But Is It Philanthropy?
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6739
5. Celebrities
Bono and Friends would be an excellent title for this year's philanthropy record, if there were one. It was hard to turn around without seeing another celebrity embracing philanthropy, traveling to Africa, fighting disease or poverty or oppression.
We Still Haven't Found What We're Looking For
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5695
6. Senator Charles Grassley
Senate hearings on potential changes in the regulation of nonprofits, led by frequent nonprofit critic Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, had the sector wondering about big changes in Federal law. As onPhilanthropy contributor contributor Paul Firstenberg noted: "These developments would seem to carry a clear message: tax exempt organizations should move quickly to get their own house in order before changes are legislated."
Preparing Nonprofit Directors for the Coming Changes in Governance
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6689
7. Cause Marketing
Consumer products of all shapes and sizes and their brand managers discovered philanthropy this year, as cause marketing exploded. It's everywhere, from the corner grocer to the biggest of big boxes to online stores and luxury peddlers. Back in June, we wrote: "Remember the phrase, 'you are what you drive?' You can apply it to what you eat, where you live, what you wear, watch or listen to - and how you give." Marketers understood this in 2006 more completely than ever before. And nonprofits, a Changing Our World study found, are now spending billions to reach consumers.
Modern Philanthropy: Bring Out the Consumer Brands
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6729&security=1&news_
iv_ctrl=1161
Consumer Philanthropy: Nonprofits Spend Billions to Reach Consumers
Changing Our World Pegs Marketing Spending at $7.6 Billion Annually
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6863&security=1&news_
iv_ctrl=1161
8. The Nobel
Contributor Bodi Luse nailed it: Mohammad Yunus calls Grameen a social business enterprise. What he means by this is different from the typical definition of social enterprise as a business created by a nonprofit to generate income. Grameen, on the other hand, is a for-profit business whose purpose is to create profits for a social purpose. It’s an interesting distinction.
Business for Peace
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6769
9. Blogs and Media
You've seen the magazine covers, the special segments on television, the sections in the newspaper, the philanthropy columnists. Heck, philanthropy made the cover of the Economist twice in one year! Philanthropy hit the mainstream media this year, but it also found a big place in the blogosphere - 2006 was the year of the philanthropy blog; indeed we launched two blogs here. Citizen media written and consumed by participants, not by sideline observers helps to change the public conversation, and it's changing what we've come to think of philanthropy.
Special Coverage of Blogs
http://flip.onphilanthropy.com/news_onphilanthropy/
blogs/index.html
Future Leaders in Philanthropy Blog
http://flip.onphilanthropy.com/
10. Don't Compete, Collaborate
If there was a cliche of the year in philanthropy, it was "collaboration." Even Bill Gates doesn't want to go it alone in backing causes - he's looking for partners. Bill Clinton's gathering of bigshots was all about leverage and collaboration. Truth is, with a million nonprofits plus religious organizations and international philanthropies all looking for donor dollars - as well as solutions to the world's ills - we'd better all collaborate, because there clearly isn't enough money to go around.
Milken Lessons: Collaborate Across Sectors
http://www.onphilanthropy.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5131
Emmet Carson to leave Minneapolis FoundationAfter serving 12 years as president and CEO of the Minneapolis Foundation, Emmett Carson will be lieaving his post to head a larger foundation in California.
According to the Minneapolis Foundation press statement, Carson will start his new position on November 1. During Carson's tenure with the Foundation, it has tripled its assets to $650 million and now administers over 100 charitable funds and more than 500 donor designated funds.
The Silicon Valley organization is the merger of two large Bay Area foundations that will manage a total of $1.5 billion in assets and manages 1,400 charitable funds.
For a profile of the Minneapolis Foundation click here.
Leavitt family foundation July 29, 2006 The family foundation of US Secretary of Health and Human Services and former Utah governor, Michael Leavitt is under attack for awarding grants to Southern Utah recipients which were used to pay for services from Leavitt family-owned businesses.
Everyone seems to agree that the foundation did nothing that is specifically illegal, but on the heels of several other Bush administration scandals and in the middle of a major Congressional investigation of charity practices, another foundation scandal smells bad.
In short, the Dixie and Anne Leavitt Foundation which was established in 2000 and distributed only $100,000 to charities in its first four years of operations, has recently awarded $500,000 to a Southern Utah University student housing program which used the grant to house students in Leavitt-family owned apartments.
The Leavitt foundation is a supporting organization of the local community foundation, the Southern Utah Foundation. The community foundation executive director, Scott Truman is a trustee of the Leavitt foundation.
A supporting organization of a community foundation must hand over its final grantmaking decisions to the community foundation. However, in this case, the community foundation did not overturn or deny the Leavitt family's wishes to award $500,000 to a grantee that they knew would eventually pay it back to the family's for-profit businesses.
The Leavitt family's self-serving grant is distressing and points out the lack of IRS regulation and oversight of foundations. However, the community foundation's willing participation in this activity is even more disturbing, and points out the major flaw in community foundations' current pre-occupation with recruiting donor advised funds.
Community foundations rarely assert acceptable custody over donor designated funds, foregoing their legal responsibility to put the community's interests over those of the donor and placing their own fundraising interests in front of the need for legal and community oversight.
Hopefully, while the media is focusing on the Leavitt family's gaffes, someone will also spend some time looking at the nature of the donor-community foundation relationship that permits this type of misjudgment.
For a profile of the Dixie and Anne Leavitt Foundation click here.
For a profile of the Southern Utah Foundation click here.
Corporate Sponsorships Grow by 10%IEG Issues Annual Report on Corporate Sponsorships
May 31, 2006 IEG, the largest and most well-respected resource on corporate sponsorship programs reports that corporate sponsorships for sports, nonprofits, entertainment, grew by more than 10% in 2005. Because corporate sponsors are moving away from traditional media outlets and looking for new creative means of advertising their products and services, IEG predicts that corporate sponsorship dollars will continue to grow by at least 10% annually during the next two to three years.
While professional and amateur sports teams receive about two-thirds of corporate sponsorship funds; nonprofit causes, arts organizations, festivals/events, and nonprofit associations attract nearly 25% of the $13.4 billion that corporations spend on sponsorship related advertising and promotional relationships. Nonprofit causes (.e.g., breast cancer, the environment, youth development) have increased their share of the sponsorship market by more than one-half billion sponsorship dollars during the last year.
According to IEG, at least 85 companies spent $15 million or more on sponsorships last year. The top five – Anheuser-Busch, Pepsico, General Motors, Coca-Cola, and Nike – all spent between $200 million and $300 million on sponsorships.
Sponsorship investments grew most in the telecommunications industry, the food industry, and among Japanese-owned auto companies. The telecommunications industry stiff competition for local and national phone customers drove sharp sponsorships increases by SBC/ATT, Verizon/MCI, and Sprint/Nextel.
Compared to the $25 million for the food industry average, McDonalds spent $115 million on sponsorships. However, compared to McDonald's, other food companies (e.g., Yum Brands KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Subway, Cadbury Schweppes, Mars, Conagra and General Mills) substantially increased their corporate sponsorship dollars specifically for nonprofit causes.
Even industries and companies in trouble, such as airline companies, department stores chains, and the Big Three American automakers increased the sponsorship dollars. Ford Motor, General Motors, and Daimler Chrysler collectively spent more than one-half billion dollars on sponsorship last year (compared to less than $225 million on grants).
IEG and other corporate bystanders say corporate sponsorships will continue to grow as the preferred form of corporate-nonprofit partnerships and corporate advertisers will continue to look for new, creative promotional venues.
If so, smaller and mid-sized nonprofits will need to educate themselves about the technicalities of corporate sponsorships, determine where their organizations fit in the sponsorship spectrum and try out sponsorships as an important new form of institutional income.
IEG (http://www.sponsorship.com/) is an interesting place to learn about the players, language, and infrastructure of corporate sponsorships. However, it is not intended for the newcomer. The Foundation Center has a small library of books and articles; and several state councils of nonprofits host workshops on corporate sponsorships.
The Access Philanthropy profiles of corporate funders generally do not include information on corporate sponsorships, however, for a funding profile of the top-ranked corporate sponsor Anheuser-Busch click here.
Michael Joyce, Paragon for Activist Grantmaking, Dies at 63Michael Joyce, Paragon for Activist Grantmaking, Dies at 63
March 3, 2006 Collectively, most important philanthropists are old. The average age of the Top 100 Foundation CEOs is in the mid-sixties. The average age of their trustees is even older -- late sixties to early seventies. We pride ourselves on running critical and uncommon trend-spotting reports in this space. Grantmaker deaths and obituaries are fairly routine.
This one however, is special. Michael Joyce, long-time CEO of both the John M. Olin Foundation, (1979-85) and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, (1985-2001) died last week of liver disease.
Bill Berkowitz of Media Transparency (http://www.mediatransparency.org/), no fan of Joyce, says “If there was a Hall of Fame for right wing philanthropists and their facilitators… one of its first inductees would undoubtedly be Michael Joyce.”
As CEO of two of the largest politically conservative foundations in America, Mike was responsible for hundreds of millions of grant dollars constantly flowing to and for conservative ideas and causes.
Organizations and people such as the Heritage Foundation, the Madison Center for Educational Affairs, the American Enterprise Institute, the Hoover Institute, Free Congress Foundation, Charles Murray, William Bennett, Robert Bork, Michael Novak, and Dinesh D Souza received substantial and ongoing support from the Olin and Bradley foundations during his leadership.
In 1986, an Atlantic Monthly article named Joyce as "one of the three people most responsible for the triumph of the conservative political movement.” His success was not only about his access to, and use of funding. Mike was also a social engineer and venture philanthropist, a politically conservative version of philanthropy pioneers John Rockefeller Jr., Andrew Carnegie, Jane Addams, Peter Cooper, Margaret Olivia Sage, and Frederic Gates.
Mikes social engineering successes continue to make headlines and legislative calendars – the federal Welfare to Work system, the School Choice movement, and the White House Faith-Based Initiatives.
His work on the Welfare to Work system is perhaps one of the most forceful modern examples of the impact a foundation can have on American life. Beginning with small grants to a few human service agencies on the Southside of Milwaukee, Joyce worked the relationship between government, the nonprofit sector, and economically disadvantaged families until he felt he had sufficient government infrastructure, community support, political advantage, and financial force to create a new welfare system.
Constantly building coalitions, cajoling allies, and bargaining with grants, Joyce moved his new welfare system initiative through the City of Milwaukee, Milwaukee County, neighboring communities, and then the State of Wisconsin.
With help from then-Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, Joyce channeled funds to several national human service agencies, think tanks, and political support groups who agreed to push the new welfare system through other states and the federal system. Finally, under a Democratic president, the federal government, Congress, most major human service agencies, and advocacy groups accepted Joyces vision of the Welfare to Work system as the accepted model for federal assistance.
His efforts on school choice and faith-based initiatives, while successful, have not fared quite as well as his efforts on welfare reform. Moreover, his short-term tenure as director of the White House Office on Faith-Based Initiatives was unsuccessful, as a government entrenchment job would be for almost anyone with Joyces imagination and will.
Near the end of his life, this former school teacher and football coach told an audience at Georgetown, “our overarching purpose was to use philanthropy to support a war of ideas to defend and help recover the political imagination of the [nations] founders--the self-evident truth that rights and worth are a legacy of the creator -- not the result of some endless revaluing of values."
Every one of us in philanthropy, whether or not we agree with his values and the outcome of his labors, must agree that his philanthropic strategies and his activism were highly successful, a great model for all political stripes of philanthropic activists.
The John M. Olin Foundation closed up shop last November, fearing that future generations of trustees might not finance the same values that the foundation founder espoused.
However, for a profile of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation click here.
Great Growth in Small FoundationsFebruary 15, 2006 The New York-based Foundation Center says there are now more 31,300 independent family foundations, which have combined assets of more than $200 billion.
The growth of these smaller family foundations is GREAT news for grantseekers, even if the apparent workload seems appalling.
Together these 31,300 small grantmakers gave away more than $12 billion in 2004, a billion dollars more than the total giving of the top 100-grantmaking US foundations (including corporate foundations, patient assistance funds, community, and independent foundations, such as Gates, Ford, Lilly, Johnson, and Packard).
The instinctive grantseeking reaction is obvious – 31,000 proposals vs. 100 proposals – not a good time/income ratio. An understandable reaction.
However, some CEOs and development officers of multi-million dollar nonprofits report that they spent as much time on their first Ford, Johnson, or Kellogg Foundation proposals as they did on all other grantseeking efforts combined.
Furthermore, Gates, Lilly, Johnson, Annenberg, and Moore have very limited interest areas. Columbus, New York Community, Boston, Silicon Valley, Chicago and other community foundations have very limited geographic regions. And the pharmaceutical company patient assistance funds are – well, you know.
True, small family foundations also have limited funding interest and geographic parameters. There are very few Rath and Max and Victoria Dreyfus foundations in world. Nevertheless, there are several reasons why the growth of small foundations is good for grantseekers everywhere:
First, small family foundations are a great training and proving ground for fundraisers and for nonprofit organizations. No one begins his or her grantseeking career with a proposal to the Carnegie Corporation; at least no one with an annual operating budget of less than ten million dollars. Small family foundations give us time to make mistakes, hone our messages, and tell us truthfully how our organizations come across to the public.
Segue to the second benefit – Ford, Mott, Carnegie, Moore, and MacArthur have their own agendas and the visions of the way the world works. If we agree with their vision, we still have a one in 100 chance of getting into the final pool of proposals. If we do not, we will never make it past the first round, and we will probably never know why. Grantmakers – large or small – are rarely so blunt that they tell the whole truth. However, small grantmakers are typically more transparent after the turndown, than the folks who work for larger funders.
The third benefit is related to the first and second -- accessibility. Even when a small family foundation says they only fund pre-selected organizations, there is still a good chance someone from the small family foundation will take a phone call or read a letter of inquiry, or listen to the request of a mutual acquaintance. This kind of accessibility significantly increases the funding opportunities of new, non-traditional, and unconnected organizations; the true research & development sector of the nonprofit industry.
Fourth benefit – the type of support. The Foundation Center reports more than 30% of small foundation grants are awarded for general operating support, nearly double the proportion of general operating support grants awarded by the large foundations and nearly quadruple the proportion awarded by the larger private foundations, such as Kellogg, Packard, and Starr.
Fifth benefit – while foundations are a critically important part of American philanthropy, 80% of charitable donations are still awarded by individual donors. With the pending trillion-dollar transfer of wealth, this percentage is expected to increase a few points within the next few years. The endowments of smaller family foundations guarantees a percentage of the trillion dollar transfer will remain in the philanthropic sector. The general transparency of foundations facilitates grantseekers efforts to determine where and how they can find their portion of the trillion dollars.
Finally, grantseekers working for local arts and human service organizations have one more reason to rejoice. While education and health are the top giving interests of both large and small foundations, the percentage of grants awarded to human service and arts organizations is much higher among social service than the proportions awarded by larger funders. This is especially true for local arts and human service groups who have very little innovative or original programs to offer Ford and Mellon.
Therefore, while we honor and appreciate the great social, education, political and scientific strides funded by the larger funders, we deeply appreciate the smaller foundations. We appreciate their consistent help, their willingness to work with smaller, less traditional charities and we appreciate what they do to prepare us for relationships with the larger foundations.
For a summary of the Foundation Center’s survey on small foundations, go to: http://www.fdncenter.org/research/trends_analysis/pdf/key_facts_fam.pdf
For a profile of the Ford Foundation click here.
For a list of small funders interested in your community or your area of work, contact ACCESS PHILANTHROPY at the email address or telephone number listed below.
Dove Self-Esteem FundPhilanthropy and the Dove Soap Superbowl Commercial
February 7, 2006: Did you see the Dove Self-Esteem Fund commercial during the Superbowl last Sunday?
More than 86 million people in 80 countries worldwide viewed the Dove Self-Esteem Fund commercial, which cost more than $2.5 million for 45 seconds of airtime. Created by Ogilvy/New York, the commercial shows clips of young women questioning their looks, their intelligence, and their self-worth. The commercial tells us to get involved and support these young women. The ad also reports that Dove Soap has established a fund to back up its support for women & girls self-esteem.
(A subsidiary of the British and Dutch-owned Unilever Group, Dove is the worlds largest soap company; selling nearly three billion dollars worth of soap, shampoos, conditioners and body washes annually.)
Did you wonder if the Dove Self-Esteem Fund is a new grantmaking opportunity for your organization?
In a word: not-so-much.
Taking a page from the Avon Breast Cancer campaign, Dove is putting up millions for this great cause, but not for grants. According to the webpage (http://www.dove.ca/doveselfesteemfund/)
”The Dove Self-Esteem Fund is a national resource established as a link to Doves Campaign for Real Beauty, a program aimed at changing the current, narrow definition of beauty. We believe that to make a real difference, we must take action and contribute in ways that will help women and girls celebrate their individual beauty.
The goal of the Fund is two-fold: 1) Develop tools and resources to help Canadian women and girls build stronger self-esteem and 2) Support organizations in Canada that foster a broader definition of beauty and positive self-image among women or girls."
Currently, the Fund has two partners – The National Eating Disorder Information Centre (NEDIC) of Canada and ANEB, the Quebec Association for Assistance to Persons Suffering from Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia.
The Fund is working with these organizations to create support websites, traveling exhibitions, educational information, and even crisis telephone hotlines.
The Philanthropy Angle: According to the webpage, in 2004 the Fund created a traveling photography exhibition that generated $20,000 for NEDIC. This year, the company will contribute twenty-five cents to the Self-Esteem Fund – up to $25,000 – every time you email the commercial to a friend. No word yet on what the $25,000 will be used for.
Email and telephone inquiries to the company and the advertising agency have not been returned yet.
Grantseekers should probably stick with the Unilever United States Foundation or even better, stick a spoon in one of Unilevers other products, Ben & Jerrys Homemade Ice Cream.
For a profile of Unilever United States Foundation click here.
Merger Season Merger Season
January 26, 2006: During the last few weeks, three major corporate mergers have been in the news: 1) the Citigroup purchase of Legg Mason, 2) the Boston Scientific purchase of Guidant and 3) the merger between CBS-owned UPN and Warner-owned WB television networks.
Citigroup/Legg Mason: The largest US banking firm, Citigroup recently completed its purchase of Baltimore-based brokerage firm Legg Mason. Citigroup plans to merge these operations with its Smith Barney subsidiary.
While the merger was amicable at the management level, several Legg Mason brokers and clients are not pleased with (a) Citigropup hardball merger rules (brokers and clients must agree to stick with Citigroup for three years before selling/purchasing new stock), (b) the current Citigroup return on investment and (b) the idea of being associated with a firm touched by so many Wall Street scandals.
The Philanthropy Angle: Before its merger with Travelers Insurance in 1999, Citibank was the finest bank-related philanthropy in the US, if not the world. However, the merger fuzzied the Citigroup giving program and Travelers Insurance CEO Sandy Weill prefered higher education philanthropy, which did not mix well with the Citibank neighborhood- based philanthropy. The result is a complicated and stagnant domestic giving program (their international program remains one of the best in the business).
Legg Mason philanthropy, on the other hand remains generous, simple, and forthright. However, company giving is based primarily in the Maryland- Washington DC- Northern Virginia area. So, no one outside of this area will be negatively affected by the merger.
Both corporations awarded relatively the same number of annual grants to local groups, Citigroup gave 40-50 annually in MD-DC-VA during 2003-05, while Legg Mason normally awards 45-55 to local groups. There has been some giving overlap for the larger recipients (e.g., YMCA, the public library, major performing arts groups).
If the Citigroup history of post-merger philanthropy continues, these major local grantees will be the only ones immediately affected by the merger. Their grant income from the combined entities will shrink by a factor of 33%-66% over the next year. However, if Citigroup keeps the Baltimore office open (a big “if”), smaller organizations should continue to receive the same or slightly less funding from the combined operation. If Legg Mason offices are moved to New York however, the number of recipients and the size of grants will dramatically decline over the next few years.
Boston Scientific/Guidant: Guidant has gone through a few bad years. Questions from the SEC, equipment recalls, bad mergers, and a jilting by Johnson & Johnson have dropped morale, stock prices and company philanthropy.
On the other hand, like the company itself, Boston Scientific philanthropy is beginning to mature and grow. The foundation strategies are now moving beyond the self-indulgent "strategic philanthropy" phase that many new health and technology companies exhibit in their early years as corporate philanthropists.
Both companies are involved in cardiology side of high technology, both have operations in California, Minnesota & Indiana; and both have struggled to keep ahead of constantly changing developments in cardio-high tech health field. Other than what the purchase will do to Boston Scientific indebtedness, most analysts say this should be a good merger for both companies.
The Philanthropy Angle Both companies have foundations. However, Boston Scientific is distributing $2 million annually, while Guidant gives away nearly $15 million. This distribtuion disparity, their overlapping business interests, and the fact that both companies have substantial operations in Indianapolis and St. Paul-Minneapolis, suggests that something will have to change in the philanthropy area.
The Paprocki Theorem on Post-Merger Corporate Philanthropy: “The Alpha CEO (the one who emerges as the CEO of the newly combined corporation) gets to determine what type, what programs, and how much philanthropy the new company will have.” unfortunately applies in this situation:
Boston Scientific CEO Jim Tobin is not really a community-philanthropy kinda guy. A Harvard grad and former Navy lieutenant, Mr. Tobin has had plenty of experience with high tech health, serving as an officer with Baxter International and Biogen before joining Boston Scientific in 1999. He also serves on the board of two other high tech health companies, Applera and Curis; but his only charity involvement is a membership on the board of directors of Boston Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
Back of the Envelope Calculation: While the Guidant purchase suggests Boston Scientific will continue to ramp up its efforts to be a major “player” in the health field (along with Baxter, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Medtronic, GE et. al), it is difficult to envision Tobin and the Boston Scientific corporate culture moving from $2 million to more than $17 million in annual giving.
Guidant obligations (including pledges through 2008) will be kept and its business-related philanthropy will be retained. However, it is likely that Guidant higher education grants, fellowships, and local grants programs, along with annual gifts to United Way will be cut by 33% to 50% over the next three years.
UPN-WB Networks: Neither of the to-be merged entities or their parent corporations has much invested in philanthropy. There is no reason to believe the merged network will have anything resembling a normal corporate giving program. Nothing else to say, except that we will miss the dancing frog.
For a profile of Citigroup Foundation click here.
Construction Companies and PhilanthropyForbes reports construction companies have the highest return on investment over the last five years
January 4, 2006 -- Last month, Forbes magazine published its annual list of the 400 best large companies in America, that is, companies whose stock prices rose the most during the past 12 months. Also known as the Forbes Platinum 400, these publicly held companies are ranked by sales, net income, and of course, company stock price performance during the last year, as well as their performance during the last five years.
Software and technology companies with the newest gadgets and utilities, such as Seagate, Activision and SanDisk had the best return on investment during the past year, but over the last five years (including the financially disastrous years of 2002-03), the home construction industry outperformed all other industries.
Of the top twenty companies with the best return on investment during the past five years, seven were construction companies: Brookfield Homes, William Lyon Homes, Hovnanian Enterprises, Building Materials Inc., Meritage Homes, NVR, and Ryland Group. All had a 50% to $100% return on investment during the past five years.
Also among the top sixty companies were seven other construction groups: Beazer Homes, DR Horton, MDC Holdings, KB Homes, Pulte Homes, Technical Olympic, and Lennar. That is fourteen of the top sixty companies!
In an era when computer and technology companies are front-page news, nearly one-fourth of the best performing companies are in the old-fashioned residential construction business.
While recent news stories about the real estate and construction industries have been less favorable (“stocks dip as home building wobbles,” real estate job engine slows down”, “US Housing Still Overvalued”). Stories about individual home construction companies still report record sales during the past quarter and optimistic predictions for the coming year.
The Philanthropy Angle : of the fourteen construction companies in the Forbes Platinum 60 only six have formal giving programs. Just one – Lennar – sponsors a charitable foundation; and five have formal corporate giving programs: Williams Lyon Homes Corporate Giving Program, NVR Inc. Corporate Giving Program, Ryland Group Inc. Corporate Giving Program, and Pulte Homes Inc. Corporate Giving Program, and KB Homes Corporate Giving Program.
Transparency: While these six may have formal giving programs, with the exception of Lennar Foundation, none provides helpful information about their giving programs on their webpage, by telephone or by email.
Although all of these companies have a presence in several states, but most report their philanthropy is based primarily in their headquarters communities, Our efforts to get secure philanthropy information from local company representatives in non-headquarters states failed miserably.
This is what we could find about the six companies with giving programs:
Lennar: Mostly Florida (presence in 9 states) with general interest in education, human services, and health.
Pulte: Mostly Michigan (presence in 23 states) with general interest in education, housing, environment, arts and human services for underprivileged youth.
Ryland: Mostly in California (presence in 18 states) with broad interest in adult education, mental and physical health, family-based services, and housing.
NVR: Mostly in Delaware, Maryland, DC, and Virginia (presence in 11 states) with general interest in adult education, housing, and some youth development.
William Lyons: Mostly Southern California with interest in performing arts.
KB Homes: Mostly in California (presence in 13 states) with interest in human services, youth development, housing and civic projects.
The Local Angle : While national construction companies have limited interest in philanthropy, local construction companies have shown a much greater concern for local community and charitable concerns. Our research in the Atlanta, Washington DC, and Minneapolis-St Paul metro areas show more consistent and much more transparent philanthropy among construction and development companies in those communities.
While local construction companies maintain some philanthropic interest in education, human services, and housing, we found the major construction company donors in these three metro areas were much more interested in the arts, faith-based organizations, and civic projects (e.g., downtown development, urban beautification, local private colleges and schools, and general school/government improvement).
Not surprisingly, we also found that local construction company philanthropy is typically connected to owners family philanthropy. If the family is interested in homelessness, chances are the company will have the same philanthropic interests.
Quick and Grubby Analysis: While national construction companies may be much more profitable than telecommunications companies and automobile manufacturers, the phone and car companies are much more reliant on huge quantities of public goodwill and good public relations.
Residential construction branding (e.g., “Oak Grove Homes,” “Rambling Creek Homes”) say little about the company. Additionally, because of the nature of the business, construction company reputations change dramatically from one planned community to another.
Furthermore, homebuyers, while socially conscious, are unlikely to buy their six-figure home based on whether the construction company gives to their favorite charities, a growing criterion for consumer telephone and automobile purchasers.
Because their consumer and stock-owing stakeholders do not care about their philanthropy, construction companies are not obliged to neither give very much, nor do they feel obligated to report on their giving. The marginal philanthropy they do sponsor – adult education, basic health and human services, seems more directed at their employees and the regulatory agencies that allow them to develop huge tracts of upper income homes in suburban and outlying communities.
On the other hand, local construction companies still have a stake in their communities. Family and community reputations still influence the local choice of architects, general contractors, and construction companies. Consequently, local construction companies give where the family feels most compelled to give and where company reputation will be best served.
Final Note :Construction company giants Weyerhaeuser and Centex both have formal giving programs but neither made the Forbes Platinum list.
For a profile of Pulte Homes Corporate Giving Program click here.
Construction Companies and PhilanthropyFor a profile of Lennar Foundationclick here.
A&P Stores Pullback from Mid-Atlantic & Southern StatesNovember 8, 2005 The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company aka A&P Grocers has announced another market pullback. The company announced last month that will soon be closing or selling its supermarket stores and distribution centers in Maryland, Washington DC, Virginia, southern New Jersey, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The company will maintain and refocus its business efforts in Connecticut, Canada, northern New Jersey, and upstate New York.
Once the second largest grocery chain in the US, A&P dissolved into an untenable blend of regional stores and private brand products. Recently, the company sold 57% of the company to the German-owned Tengelmann Group, one of the worlds largest food retailers.
Food retailers, like the drug retailers, works on very slim profit margins; and faces high labor & occupancy cost. At the same time, chains like A&P, Giant, and Winn-Dixie face overwhelming competition from mega-stores like Wal-Mart, Costco, and Target Stores. Consequently, several food retailers have been forced to collapse their markets to reduce their distribution costs or sell outright to European food retailers such as Tengelmann, ALDI, Metro AG, and Ahold.
Philanthropy Upshot A&P Stores, like the food retailing industry in general, has never been a great source of cash support for nonprofits. A&P grants are generally limited to cancer and childrens services, and mostly in Baltimore, Louisiana, and the Tri-State area of NY-NJ-CT. However, the local A&P stores have traditionally been a great source of in-kind contributions, especially dontated foods, employee-volunteers, fundraising locations, and publicity sites for small, local charities, youth sports teams, and community churches.
While Wal-Mart has tried to recreate the tradition of small community grantmaking through its thousands of grants to cheerleading squads, parish festivals, and K-12 schools, their financial resources have tightened during the past few years and their efforts have not been replicated by other mega-stores (with the possible exception of Whole Food Markets).
European food retailers like ALDI and Tengelmann have not assumed responsibility for the philanthropic traditions of their American acquisitions; and American-owned food retailers, such as Krogers, Albertsons, and Safeway are somewhat tentative in their giving programs. Hunger, nutrition, K-12 education, and youth programs remain the focus of the American food retailers giving programs.
As for the A&P story, only a few smaller charities, such as community youth groups, parish festivals, K-12 fundraisers in Baltimore, southern New Jersey, and a few other locations will be affected by the A&P market pullback, but unfortunately, fundraising opportunities for America’s most cherished charities continue to decline.
For a profile of A&P Corporate Contributions Programclick here.
Wal-Mart Foundation ProfileFor a profile of Wal-Mart Foundationclick here.
For a profile of Albertson Corporate Contributions Programclick here.
Katrina, Rita, Wilma and Insurance PhilanthropyOctober 30, 2005 -- The insurance industry payout for damages from Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Wilma and others have not been totaled yet; but industry analysts say the mark will be somewhere between forty and seventy billion dollars. According to the Insurance Information Institute, the insurance industry will lose around forty billion dollars this year. The anticipated number of claims from Katrina damage alone is ten times the number of all claims that resulted from all the hurricanes that hit Florida during 2004.
Which insurance companies were hit the hardest?
According to industry and news reports, the greatest outlays will come from Allstate and State Farm Insurance, two of the largest insurance companies in America, which collectively own between 40% and 55% of the insurance market in Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The credit ratings (and thus the cost of borrowing money) of both companies have been affected, but both companies say they will not be damaged in the long-run.
However, the hardest hit insurers will be two groups of companies:
First, those with insurance and investment portfolios heavily weighted in commercial properties on the Gulf Coast
Second, those companies located in the South who consequently have much of their property portfolios in states affected by the hurricanes.
Included in these two groups are smaller companies such as the state Farm Bureaus, Poe Insurance, Zurich, Auto Owners Insurance Group, Combined Federal Insurance, St. Paul Travelers, Alfa Insurance, Farmers Insurance Group, and USAA that have a smaller share of the Southern states insurance market, but have a larger share of their total financial resources invested in affected areas.
(Atlanta based AFLAC and ING companies were not physically affected by the storms and do not have any primary investments in Southern commerical or residential property).
Impact on Industry Philanthropy:
The Good News: During the past ten years, the insurance industry has come to view philanthropy as an integral component of its business. Insurance companies make money when they don’t have to payout on the premiums they receive. Nonprofit organizations serve the insurance industry well by preserving and protecting insurance industry investments. Consequently, it is simply good business to financially support nonprofits.
Consequently, insurance companies will probably not substantially reduce their giving budgets as they did after Florida’s catastrophic Hurricane Andrew in 1992.
More Good News: Financially, the insurance industry was doing pretty well before Katrina struck, so the industry was prepared for the disaster. For example, St. Paul Travelers will payout one billion dollars during this quarter for hurricane related disasters, but will still end the quarter in the black. Consequently, there should be no industry-wide disasters that keep most companies from maintaining their current giving programs.
The Bad News: Philanthropy from smaller, regional insurance companies with heavy investments in affected states will certainly be affected. While the Farm Bureaus, Alfa, USAA, and others have never been known for their generosity, what they had will certainly be reduced.
More Bad News: Since insurance companies are forbidden to raise premiums to cover the costs of payouts, the forty billion dollars in losses and the increased cost of credit will have to come from somewhere. Employee layoffs will reduce some of the bottom line losses, but corporate giving departments and other divisions will also have to shoulder some of the outflow.
Even More Bad News: Katrina, Rita, and Wilma have further pushed the corporate giving trend towards disaster-based priorities. A few disaster-based gifts (well-publicized, mega-donations for victims of hurricanes, tornados, famine, war relief, and terrorist activities) are cost-effective, safe, popular with employees, and more consistent with community relations goals than traditional grantmaking programs for hundreds of nonprofits.
The American Red Cross and other disaster relief groups have effectively tapped into and partnered with American corporate giving and corporate volunteer programs. Assuming there are no further internal disasters in the relief community, these relationships will continue to grow as long as there are disasters to relieve.
The Bottom Line The money to cover forty billion in insurance industry losses will have to come from somewhere. However, because of the services nonprofits provide to the insurance industry, corporate giving programs will not have to bear the full brunt of the losses.
For a profile of Allstate Foundationclick here.
For a profile of State Farm Insurance Companies Foundationclick here.
For a profile of St Paul Travelers Foundationclick here.
For a profile of USAA Foundationclick here.
Home Depot Keeps Fourth Quarter Funding for KatrinaSeptember 21, 2005 -- Typically, we do not run press releases and communiqués on this page, but here is the response from the Atlanta-based Home Depot Foundation to Hurricane Katrina:
". . .As such, The Home Depot Foundation is reserving its 2005 4th cycle grant resources to fund efforts that will lead to long-term rebuilding strategies in communities impacted by Hurricane Katrina. We will only be considering grant proposals submitted by nonprofits invited to do so by our Foundation. If you have already submitted a grant proposal, we will carry it in our system and consider it for funding in the next available open cycle . . ."
For a profile of Home Depot Foundation, click here.
For more on the effects of corporate hurricane relief contributions on other organizations, read the piece immediately following this article.
(Thanks to Luke Avery, from our client organization Minnesota Housing Partnership for this update.)
The Effects of Corporate Hurricane Relief DonationsSeptember 19, 2005: Corporate giving for Hurricane Katrina relief will exceed one billion dollars by the end of September, with another one-half billion to one billion dollars anticipated by the end of the year. Especially in light of the tsunami relief support being contributed in the same fiscal year, these gifts are a very generous show of support from Corporate America.
During our east coast workshop tour, we received several questions regarding the effects that tsunami and hurricane relief efforts will have on general corporate giving.
While the picture is not clear, and there are competing/conflicting interest, we can identify three basic questions:
First, what are the sources of Katrina Relief corporate donations? Will it come from general giving, thus reducing other grants to arts, education, health, and human service organizations?
Following the September 11th tragedies, major corporations now have budget line-items for disaster relief contributions. Some of these donations are derived from corporate charitable budgets. But others come from marketing department budgets or from the general operating budgets of CEOs and Community Relations Officers, similar to the budget line-items many companies have for public relations disasters.
Some company officials said the corporate “upside” of disaster relief donations coming from the charitable contributions line item is clear – those corporate giving officers will have substantially reduced, or no more work for the rest of the year. Those whose budgets will receive very little additional funding will use the remainder of the year planning new employee volunteer programs or developing long-awaited new giving programs.
The “downside” of charitable line-item disaster donations is just as clear –employees, consumers, neighbors and civic officials, whose contributions have been eliminated through no fault of their own, will be irate, and all of the good relationships that past contributions have created will be now be shattered or substantially diminished.
Because the downside is more immediate and effects more people than the upside, most companies will supplement their charitable giving budgets to cover existing relationships and pledges. But there will be no new or increased grants this year and probably very few next year as well.
Second, which corporations’ income will be substantially affected by the devastation, thus reducing their overall charitable contributions?
Some retailers, media companies, energy companies and manufacturers, such as McDonald’s, Knight-Ridder, Lowe’s, El Paso Energy, Amerada Hess, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, BP, Bayer, and Federated Department Stores have an extensive network of stores, plants and other holdings in the affected areas.
However insurance companies, financial services and banks, including Allstate, State Farm, USAA, Nationwide, Capital One, Ameriquest, Bank of America, US Bank Corporation, and Wachovia have billions of company dollars invested in the areas immediately affected by the tragedies.
After 9/11, federal legislation passed to protect companies from catastrophic events such as Katrina, but this protection only covers the extremes and won’t provide enough exposure to guarantee continued company contributions in other parts of the country.
We can expect that companies with smaller corporate giving programs, such as US Bank Corporations, Capital One, USAA and Ameriquest will reduce their current giving to cover these investment losses. However companies such a Bank of America and State Farm have learned to use their charitable contributions as marketing and public relations tools. They will continue at similar levels of annual giving, in spite of corporate losses.
Third, what will be the long-term effects of two catastrophic events in one year on long-term corporate charitable donation strategies?
Corporate charitable donation budgeting, priority-setting, and staffing will all be affected by 2005’s combination of tsunami and hurricane relief.
Budgeting -- Corporations will need to anticipate disaster donations and incorporate them as part of their annual giving package. If no disasters happen – great, the funds can be rolled over into the next year’s budget. But it’s very likely that global catastrophes will continue to happen annually or that other formerly lesser-known disasters will now become identified as global disasters (e.g., African famine relief). Either way, it’s a safe bet that major corporate contributions programs will be called upon annually to address a disaster of worldwide dimensions.
How will this effect less-catastrophic giving? Those corporations which have learned to use charitable giving to gratify their employees, increase their visibility, support their communities, and stimulate corporate-community interactions will continue keep their non-catastrophic charitable giving budgets at a similar or slightly lesser level of giving.
However, those companies which have little need for, or little history with such community-charitable giving interaction; will probably cutback their non-catastrophic giving budgets to pre-September 11th levels and award grants only in the areas of higher education, corporate business interests and disaster relief. Already, some companies (e.g., FedEx and CHS) have cut other giving programs in favor of one larger giving program which incorporates all types of disaster relief (hunger, natural disasters, economic downturns, employee layoffs and international security).
Priority Setting and Positioning No company can resist or avoid contributions to global disaster relief. Employees, shareholders, local relief efforts, and the competition are all expecting generous contributions. A comprehensive list of corporate contributors to Hurricane Relief that doesn’t include a company’s name is a public relations disaster for the company.
Of course, if disaster relief contributions are awarded from corporate marketing or general operations budgets, disaster donations will not affect corporate contributions at all.
Furthermore, for some companies, a single million dollar gift to disaster relief can use up a full year’s charitable giving budget. Those companies will need to switch disaster relief contributions to their marketing or general operations budgets so they retain at least some of their traditional giving programs.
On the other hand, those companies with substantially greater giving programs (e.g., Ford Motor Company or Altria or any of the pharmaceutical companies) will probably take their disaster relief gifts straight from their hundred-million dollar giving budgets, thus reducing their overall giving by the amount of their relief donations.
Local and regional companies whose disaster relief donations are not as substantial (e.g., local banks) will probably also reduce their annual giving budgets by the amount of their disaster relief donations.
Therefore, expect that mid-sized givers who need to award substantial donations for disaster relief and those companies which make disaster donations from their marketing or general operations budgets will not reduce their traditional giving programs to make way for disaster donations. On the other hand, larger companies which use their giving programs to cover disaster relief donations and smaller, local companies which make smaller disaster relief donations will reduce their overall giving budgets.
Staffing We can expect most companies’ corporate contributions staff to be involved with employee or community disaster relief fundraising drives; therefore being less accessible to other recipients and donation seekers. Coming right before the annual United Way campaign season, the hurricane relief is particularly unfortunate for workplace giving campaigns which have only recently been returning to 1990s levels of employee support and giving.
While these corporate staffing shortages may not be too bad for local charities in the short-term, hopefully, corporate management will not assume that these absences mean they can allocate fewer charitable contributions staff in long-run.
Next to those misdirected and misinformed “strategic philanthropic initiatives” that began in the late 1990s and early 2000s, lack of adequate corporate staffing is probably the greatest problem facing corporate charitable contributions programs.
Since corporate-community relationships are built not only on corporate cash, but on access to corporate people, corporations which remove or reduce the size of their community relations and corporate giving staff are hurting the very initiatives they were intended to initially support. It would be too bad if the disasters that hurt so many communities ended up also hurting the corporations which are generously supporting relief efforts.
For a current list of major corporate contributions to Katrina relief, go to:
The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s current online issue: http://philanthropy.com/free/update/2005/09/2005091602.htm
CNN Money online article dated September 15 http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/31/news/fortune500/firms_hurricane/
The Foundation Center’s Philanthropy News Digest from September 16
http://fdncenter.org/pnd/hurricane/corporations.jhtml
Bank of America to Purchase MBNAJune 30, 2005 Merger of the Week North Carolina-based Bank of America announced today it will buy Delaware-based MBNA for $35 billion. B of A anticipates $1.25 billion in restructuring costs and efficiencies including the loss of 6,000 jobs.
Beyond the purchase itself, the buyout is noteworthy because it signals the potential for further consolidation in an industry that seems to be overly-consolidated already. For example, many industry experts believe Washington Mutual, the largest US savings & loan conglomerate was too big for a take-over, but the purchase of MBNA suggests that WaMu may be ripe for the picking.
Furthermore, although it is a bank, the nucleus of MBNA’s business is its credit card operations, especially affinity credit cards. Several industry analysts believe that companies which depend primarily on credit card operations, such as American Express and Capital One, will eventually have to merge with other financial institutions. The MBNA buyout further strengthens this argument.
Current Giving Patterns: Bank of America is a leader in corporate philanthropy, awarding more than $95 million annually in nearly forty states. Like most banks, B of A has diverse giving interests and awards millions of dollars through regional and branch offices. Traditionally, about half of the bank’s funding is in education, twenty percent for human services, and about ten percent each for health, community development and arts. The bank also manages private foundations for more than one hundred clients throughout the southern and western states.
MBNA also awards most of its $50 million annual giving budget for education, especially for K-12 through its Excellence in Education program. However, most MBNA grants are awarded to groups in DE, MD, NJ, ME, and Cleveland.
Both MBNA and Bank of America have extensive corporate sponsorship, matching gift and employee volunteer programs.
Going Forward B of A reports the company “intends to build upon its previously announced 10-year, $750 billion community development goal to include a specific community development lending and investment goal for Delaware. The specifics of this goal will be determined based on future dialogue with Delaware community and civic leaders.”
Although the both banks have operations in ME, NJ, DE, and OH, the only widespread overlap has been in Maryland, where both banks have significant operations. Maryland (and other) nonprofits which receive grants from both banks should consider alternative fundraising strategies.
Besides the overlapping grants problem, the merger will probably be a good experience for most nonprofits, especially those in the MBNA areas of operation. Bank of America’s corporate culture typically has a positive affect on the giving practices on its merger partners.
For a profile of Bank of America Foundation, click here.
MBNA Foundation ProfileFor a profile of MBNA Foundation , click here.
Washington Mutual Foundation ProfileFor a profile of Washington Mutual Foundation , click here.
American Express Foundation ProfileFor a profile of American Express Foundation , click here.
Capital One Financial Corporation Giving Program ProfileFor a profile of Capital One Financial Corporation Contributions Program, click here.
Starr Foundation Board Chair Steps DownJune 10, 2005 Starr Foundation Board Chair Maurice “Hank” Greenberg Steps Down.
One of the largest insurance companies in the world, AIG was founded by C.V. Starr, a former OSS officer in Southeast Asia who parlayed his OSS and CIA connections into one of the largest import/export businesses in the world and then parlayed that business into American Insurance Group – AIG.
Fifty years ago, C.V. Starr also established the Starr Foundation, which currently has assets of more than $3.5 billion and is one of the 15 largest foundations in the U.S., just behind Packard, MacArthur and Pew, and slightly larger than Annenberg, Annie Casey, Rockefeller, Kresge, and CS Mott.
In 2004, the Foundation awarded more than 800 grants worth $160 million (down 16% from 2003), primarily in the areas of education, medicine and healthcare, human needs, public policy, and Asian arts & culture.
Eventually, Mr. Starr (uncle of Whitewater Prosecutor Ken Starr) turned over the reins of the company -- and the Foundation -- to AIG CEO Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, whose recent problems have made national headlines and involved several notables including New York State Attorney General Elliot Spitzer and the Sage of Omaha, Warren Buffet.
Although many companies get into hot water with regulators, their foundations are rarely affected by corporate scandals. Not so with the AIG/Starr Foundation relationship.
The Foundation is legally separate from the company, however the majority of Starr Foundation directors are AIG officers, including Greenberg who has served for several years as the foundation’s board chair and funding pilot. In return, the Foundation operates the company’s scholarship programs – an eight million dollar annual outlay for 900 AIG employees and their families.
In addition to the programmatic and financial entanglements (the Foundation owns at least 2.5 percent of the company’s stock), what’s attracted the attention of AG Spitzer is the fact that some grants from the Starr Foundation have been awarded to third-party organizations which have awarded grants and fellowships to Starr employees and managers.
Going Forward Because the Starr Foundation is so closely tied programmatically and financially to the company, the company’s misfortunes and misdeeds have a direct affect on the Foundation’s giving practices. Substantial funding for hundreds of hospitals, colleges, and museums will be affected and other organizations which have waited patiently in line for their chance at a Starr Foundation grant will continue to wait.
On the up-side, in addition the Starr Foundation, both AIG and its AIG American General subsidiary have corporate giving programs. Both have general giving interests including education, arts, youth, community affairs and human services.
The company’s recent advertising blitz (“we know money”) and its aggressive move into the business of auto insurance guarantees the company will retain a high profile in philanthropy.
However, it is likely the company and the Foundation’s relationship will become more detached. The Foundation will probably diversify both its board of directors and its stock portfolio, while the company giving programs will increase their corporate giving amounts and profiles. All of which are generally good things for both current and prospective grant applicants.
The Personal Note While Mr. Greenberg was heavily involved in nonprofits(such as, Council of Foreign Relations, Rockefeller University, Manhattan Institute, Asia Society, New York Presbyterian Hospital and JFK Center for the Performing Arts), his successor at AIG (and perhaps the Starr Foundation), Martin J. Sullivan has shown little interest in nonprofit work.
Born in Great Britain, Mr. Sullivan lived and worked in London until an AIG promotion tranferred him to New York in 1996. While very involved in international trade associations, so far Mr. Sullivan’s US charitable endeavors have been limited to a few benefits and general charities, such as the British Memorial Garden Trust and the Community Foundation of Southeastern Connecticut.
For a profile of the Starr Foundation current giving, click here.
For a profile of AIG Corporate Giving Program current giving, click here.
For a profile of AIG American General Corporation Contributions Program current giving, click here.
Federated Buys May Department Stores...SomedayMay 10, 2005 Merger of the Week: A couple months back, Cincinnati-based Federated Department Stores (including Bloomingdale's and five regional chains: Bon-Macy's, Burdines-Macy's, Rich's-Macy's, Lazarus-Macy's, and Goldsmith's-Macy's) purchased St. Louis-based May Department Stores (including Marshall Fields, Lord & Taylor, Foley's, Filene's, and Hecht's and several bridal shops).
Before giving our impressions of the merger, we've been waiting for word on Federated's plans for May's philanthropy programs, including the foundation and several corporate giving programs. So far -- no word on the eventual outcome. But two things have happened recently that suggest Federated may leave May's philanthropy program in place for a few months or longer:
First, May Department Stores' community and philanthropy webpages have just been updated. No special news, but why update a webpage if the place is shutting down in a couple months?
Second, the FTC and SEC have recently asked for several new documents related to the merger. Such requests are not unusual for a merger of this size, but it does suggest that the final resolution may not take place during this calendar year, leaving the May Department Store Foundation with about $16 million to give away by the end of the year.
Current Giving Patterns Like most retail stores, both Federated and May award a lot of smaller grants ($1,000 to $20,000) to a lot of local charities in more than half of the United States.
While both have a diverse giving portfolio, Federated puts more money in human services, civic/community, health and the arts than May which gives considerably more to education projects. Neither awards much to environmental causes, religion or international concerns.
Merger UpshotAt some during the next couple years, St. Louis charities will feel the bite of losing the headquarters of a Fortune 500 company. And of course, communities in which Federated subsidiaries compete with May Department Stores' subsidiaries will lose at least one grantseeking opportunity.
Colleges and universities which received considerably more from May than from Federated will probably lose some grants, as will disability-related organizations to whom May Department Stores was very generous.
Not immediately, but in the next few years, we can also expect an increase of funds to arts and health organizations, a shift away from May's education funding to Federated's commitment to arts and health. Because of May's current commitment to United Way, human services funding may not shift much.
Structurally, Federated's philanthropy is very geographically diverse. Grant contacts are located in major subsidiaries' headquarters (SF, Miami, NYC, Atlanta and Seattle). So we can expect a new branch of the Federated Foundation to be located in St. Louis.
We will also see a new Federated Foundation online application form and perhaps a shift to more store-manager based giving. We wouldn't be surprised if Federated also develops a core giving emphasis, such as Target Stores' local education support program.
For a profile of Federated Department Stores current giving, click here.
Federated Buys May Department Stores...SomedayFor a profile of May Department Stores current giving, click here.
April 14 2005 Looking for a grant from Nestle USA? You may be interested in what Nestle USA's CEO says about corporate giving.
In a speech to the Boston Executives Club, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe called giving something back to society a "wrongheaded idea" based on the "fallacious assumptions" that business activities are fundamentally exploitative and that free market transactions are a zero-sum game in which one party wins and the other loses.
Brabeck says "there is some good reason for corporate philanthropy", but that companies must be careful with what they give back because they are handing out money that belongs to shareholders and should do it “if it works out as a good investment”.
For a profile of the Nestle USA Foundationclick here.
Verizon and MCI Agree to Take-OverFebruary 14, 2005 Merger of the Week: In the third major telecommunications merger in as many months, New York-based Verizon Communications agreed to purchase MCI (WorldCom) for $6.8 billion. The merger will save bankruptcy-and scandal burdened MCI from further embarrassment and will provide Verizon with a strong international presence as well as a much larger corporate client base.
Verizon (the result of a merger between GTE and Bell Atlantic) is the largest of the remaining regional Bell companies. Verizon appears to have overcome competition for MCI from another regional Bell, Denver-based Qwest Communications which itself has several financial and scandal problems. In fact, some industry analysts predict Qwest's failure to purchase MCI may mean Qwest will soon be on the sales block as well.
Corporate Giving Verizon's philanthropy is one of the top five corprorate giving programs in the US, distributing more than $75 million in 2003. The company focuses its funding in the areas of literacy, technology, and workforce development. However, about 20% of the company's funding is awarded for arts, community development, health and other interest areas.
Verizon's funding is geographically focused in its 13-state service area, but last year the company awarded grants in more than 40 states. The company's online application process is considered one of the best of its kind.
On the other hand, MCI's philanthropy is minimal, awarding around $1 million, mostly through itsin-kind teacher curriculum and training program known as Marco Polo.
A few years ago, our study on telecom corporate giving for Racial and Ethnic communities ranked MCI dead last among the top nine telecom companies. Their most recent grants list indicates little change in this area.
Merger Upshot:Verizon has not announced plans for the MCI or Verizon Foundations. However, two things will probably occur:
(1) Verizon's international giving will increase. When American companies acquire companies with strong international holdings, their international giving usually increases to reflect the new business interests.
(2) MCI's Marco Polo program will last for another year and then disappear altogether or be incorporated into a new Verizon program.
For a profile of the Verizon Foundationclick here.
For a profile of the MCI/WorldCom Foundationclick here.
For a description of other major telcom mergers -- between SBC and AT&T and between Sprint and Nextel scroll down this page.
SBC to Purchase AT&TFebruary 1, 2005 Merger of the Week: As we've been predicting for the past year, former Baby Bell, San Antonio-based SBC Communications has formally announced its intention to purchase former Ma Bell, New York-based AT&T Company for $16 billion.
Formerly known as Southwestern Bell, in the last few years SBC has absorbed West Coast Baby Bell Pacific Telesis and Midwest Baby Bell Ameritech, as well as several smaller cellular communications companies into the Cingular Wireless subsidary, which it owns with BellSouth.
Corporate Giving: Once one of the most respected corporate grantmakers in America, AT&T Foundation has recently been feeling the pinch of corporate business problems. Funding has declined from $54 million in 2001 to $23 million in 2003.
Last year, former AT&T Foundation CEO Tim McClimon announced his resignation. Tim was a strong advocate of corporate funding for the arts as well as an promoter of a broad corporate funding agenda. His successor, Marilyn Resnick, a former educator and a vocal supporter of corporate support for education (especially K-12 schools) has focused the foundation's agenda in this direction.
During the last ten years, SBC Foundation has grown dramatically from a weak, under-funded corporate giving program to a powerful grantmaking presence in 30 states and in several different interest areas. The foundation's Excelerator Program annually awards hundreds of technology support grants for schools, arts, human services, community and health organizations. While foundation funding has decreased during the last three years from $106 million in 2001 to $78 million in 2003, the foundation has increased its equipment donation, employee-volunteer, and local funding programs.
The SBC Foundation continues its earlier support for higher education and human services (especially United Way), but has also moved aggressively into the arts, community development, and K-12 funding fields. The company's funding for racial and ethnic communities has also increased dramatically from less than $1 million in 1995 to more than $25 million during the 2001-02 reporting period.
Merger Upshot:Analysts say that the merger will cost 13,000 jobs and several quarters of lowered income projections. Almost certainly SBC will not maintain the two companies' 2003 combined giving budgets of $101 million, but will award somewhere in the $80 million to $90 million range during the 2005-2006 giving seasons, with declining amounts in subsequent years.
There is also bad news for arts organizations and civil rights organizations which will no longer have the strong corporate advocate and funder they once had in AT&T.
However, the worst news is reserved for New York City, where AT&T awarded nearly half its funding; and organizations in those states (especially New England, Mid-Atlantic and the Plains states) where AT&T has a funding presence but SBC does not.
For a profile of the SBC Foundationclick here.
For a profile of the AT&T Foundationclick here.
Procter & Gamble Absorbs Gillette CompanyJanuary 28, 2005 Merger of the Week: Cinncinati-based Procter & Gamble purchased Boston-based Gillette Company for $57 billion. Although plans for the Gillette Company giving program have not been reported, typically, when the P&G buys another corporation, it absorbs weaker corporate giving programs and allows stronger corporate giving programs to remain operating independently. The Gillette program is not a strong program.
The Gillette Company seems to be phasing out its foundation in favor of an unnamed corporate giving program. The foundation reports not awarding any grants during the last three years and significant sections of its tax report for the last two years are missing, including contact people, procedures, priorities and grantmaking critieria. Although the company has research and manufacturing locations in nine states, apparently only a few national groups and organizations in the company's hometown of Boston actually receive grants.
The Procter & Gamble Fund is a reflection of the company's very broad commercial interests. The Fund awards grants in more than 40 states and in more than 30 interest areas. Half of the funding is awarded for higher education, 30% for human services, and the remaining amount to arts and other interest areas.
Merger Upshot: Gillette grantees, especially groups in Boston, MA should expect a change within the next 12-18 months.
For a profile of the Procter & Gamble Fundclick here.
For a profile of the Gillette Charitable & Educational Foundationclick here.
Oracle Takes Over PeopleSoft December 29, 2004 Merger of the Week: California-based software company Oracle Corporation announced today that is has completed the first phase of its take over of California and Denver-based competitor PeopleSoft Corporation.
After a year of struggling, PeopleSoft Corporation fired its CEO and conceded defeat to the larger and stronger Oracle Corporation, led by ubiquitous CEO Larry Ellison.
Oracle has three corporate giving programs -- an equipment contributions program, the Oracle Corporate Giving Program and the Oracle Education Foundation. All three programs have been indefinitely suspended pending the outcome of the merger and, according to the corporation, a major overhaul of its giving program to be more reflective of the company's international interests.
The company reports that it will continue its ThinkQuest school-based webpage design competition.
PeopleSoft's Corporate Giving Program has also been suspended and its webpage already marked with the Oracle Corporation logo.
Merger Upshot: Larger, more traditional organizations in the companies' headquarters communities -- the San Francisco Peninsula and Denver, Colorado -- may see some cutbacks in giving. But like most companies in the software industry, neither company is generous with cash grants or particularly expansive in contributing outside of its immediate corporate locations.
For a profile of the Oracle Corporate Contributions Programclick here.
For a profile of the Oracle Education Foundationclick here.
For a profile of the PeopleSoft Corporate Giving Programclick here.
For a profile of Oracle CEO Larry Ellison's private foundation the Ellison Medical Foundationclick here.
Exelon Purchases PSEG December 21, 2004 Merger of the Week: Chicago-based energy company Exelon Corporation announced today that is has purchased Newark-based energy company PSEG.
Exelon alreadys owns Chicago's primary power company Commonwealth Edison and Philadelphia's electric utility PECO. Both subsidiaries continue to operate their own corporate charitable contributions programs. Compared to other power companies, neither is very generous nor very open about how much they give, how to apply or which organizations have received grants in the past.
On the other hand, PSEG, which awards grants through a foundation, has been relatively very generous ($3.6 million annually), very transparent regarding its giving procedures and its grantees. PSEG's full list of grantees is available on their webpage.
Merger Upshot: If Exelon follows its past pattern of permitting subsidiaries to continue their giving programs without disruption, grantees in the PSEG area will notice very little difference in the way the company does its charitable giving. However, PSEG's giving program is in stark contrast to Exelon's current giving practices and may be too far from Exelon's mainstream corporate culture to remain unaffected by the purchase.
For a profile of Exelon Corporation's Giving Program, click here.
For a profile of the PSEG Foundation, click here.
Sprint & Nextel Merger December 15, 2004 -- The boards of Sprint Communications and Nextel approved merging the two companies to create Sprint-Nextel Inc., a $40 billion combination of mass market telecommunication customers from Sprint and upscale business customers from Nextel.
While Sprint awards more than $5.5 million annually, compared to the philanthropy of their larger competitors (e.g., Verizon, SBC, and AT&T), both Sprint and Nextel are extremely tight-fisted.
Historically, neither company has a tradition of generous giving. (In our 1997 survey of telecomm giving to racial and ethnic communities, Sprint ranked 10th out of 11 surveyed companies, outspending MCI by $300,0000).
Sprint's current problems with its Sprint FON division may justifiy its current lack of giving. And Nextel's base of business customers doesn't really compel the company to respond to community needs. Therefore, neither company is doing much in philanthropy, however both companies have extensive sponsorship programs.
Current Sprint Chairman and Chief Executive Gary Forsee will serve as Chair and CEO of the merged company. Typically, the CEO of a newly merged company brings his/her philanthropic tradition with them to the new corporation.
Merger Upshot: Since neither company is very generous, few organizations will notice a significant difference due to the merger. However, since Sprint is a better philanthropist than Nextel, Forsee's position as CEO of the newly merged company is probably good news for organizations receiving (or hoping to receive) support from the companies.
No final date has been set for the merger and there have been no announcements regarding the interim status companies' giving programs. In the meantime, you can visit the companies' current giving profiles at Access Philanthropy.
For a profile of the Sprint Foundation, click here.
For a profile of the Sprint Corporation Contributions Program, click here.
For a profile of the Nextel Community Connect Program, click here.
Mattel Foundation Once Again in Play December 10, 2004 -- The world's largest toy company, Mattel Inc. announced that it has fulfilled its five-year, $62 million pledge to build and equip the Mattel Children's Hospital at UCLA and will once again be awarding general grants to children's charities and children's health-related organizations.
The company also has a corporate giving program, a toy donation program through Gifts Inkind, a Philanthropy Brand Initiative, and a small toy donations program through its American Girl subsidiary.
For the past few years, the Foundation has awarded a limited number of grants to company-related arts, education, health and human service organizations, especially in its hometowns of Buffalo, NY and Los Angeles, CA. However, the foundation announced that, beginning in January, 2005, the foundation will be accepting unsolicited proposals from its new online application process.
In the meantime, you can visit the foundation's current profile at Access Philanthropy. For a profile of the Mattel's Children's Foundation, click here.
You can also visit Access Philanthropy's philanthropy profile of Mattel's top competitor, Hasbro Toys For a profile of the Hasbro's Charitable Trust, click here.
For a profile of the Hasbro's Children's Foundation , click here. The Children's Foundation funds nationally, while the Charitable Trust focuses on New England, especially its homestate of Rhode Island
IBM Moves into Global Health Philanthropy November 24, 2004 -- As we have been predicting for some time, now that IBM's long-time CEO Louis Gerstner has retired, the new CEO Sam Palmisano is taking a long look at IBM's philanthropy and things are changing.
IBM recently announced that the company's philanthropy will focus more resources on global health, especially AIDS. This shift should come as no surprise to people who know:
(1) Palmisano spent several years as head of IBM's Global Services group,
(2) Several new surveys indicate the American public wants greater corporate involvement in the global fight against AIDS,
(3) IBM is easily rankled by the highly visible successes of its arch-rival Microsoft, whose CEO, Bill Gates is heavily involved in global health philanthropy.
So far, the company has only donated software and hardware to launch World Community Grid, "a global humanitarian effort that applies the unused computing power of individual and business computers to help address the world's most difficult health and societal problems." But World AIDS Day is December 1st and we can expect more announcements then or shortly thereafter.
In the meantime, you can read the company's profiles at Access Philanthropy. For a profile of the IBM's Corporate Giving Program, click here.
For a profile of the IBM's International Foundation, click here.
Kmart and Sears Announce MergerNovember 17, 2004 -- Kmart and Sears announced their intention to merge operations early next year. Kmart, the #3 discount retailer in the US has 1500 stores in 49 states. Sears has 2000 stores in all 50 states.
Both companies will retain their names, although Kmart headquarters will be moved from Michigan to Sears hometown in Hoffman Estates, IL. Kmart's current CEO, Ed Lambert will become Chairman of the Board of the merged company and the Sears CEO will be the CEO and Vice Chairman.
Kmart's philanthropy has been mostly on-hold since its bankruptcy a couple years back. They award some grants, mostly to local Michigan charities and recently have been awarding some cash gifts through local store managers (ala Wal-Mart). The company has also been open to contributed goods through store managers and the company's Corporate Giving Program. Areas of interest include family services, education, community development, youth development and children's services. The company does not provide a list of grants
Sears has two giving programs. The Foundation awards only two or three grants per year, primarily to the United Negro College Fund and the United Way. The corporate giving program's American Dream program donates millions of furniture, tools, equipment and appliances to organizations building homes for low income families, especially Habitat for Humanity. The company reports the campaign as a $100 million effort but provides no specific grant or contribution amounts
The merger upshot: Not much. The Kmart CEO will get to determine what philanthropy looks like and the combined company will probably keep the American Dream signature program. A few transition grants will probably be awarded in Michigan and along with a few high-visibility grants in Chicago. Most of us will probably not notice anything until a year or two after the merger, when corporate giving gets renewed attention from company managers.
In the meantime, you can visit company profiles at Access Philanthropy:
For a profile of the Kmart Corporate Giving Program, click here.
For a profile of the Sears Roebuck Foundation, click here.
For a profile of the Sears Roebuck and Company Contributions Program, click here.
Paul Allen Consolidates Six Foundations09/01/04 -- One of the founders of Microsoft and a member of Forbes "Ten Wealthiest Americans" list , Paul G. Allen announced the formation of The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation. The single foundation was created through the consolidation of Allen's six previous foundations (The Allen Foundation for the Arts, The Paul G. Allen Charitable Foundation, The Paul G. Allen Foundation for Medical Research, The Paul G. Allen Forest Protection Foundation, The Allen Foundation for Music, and The Paul G. Allen Virtual Education Foundation).
Application guidelines and deadlines virtually remain the same. However, the foundation is shifting, adding and renaming some priorities. The new Foundation's press release and FAQ are online at http://www.pgafoundations.com/TemplateMain.aspx?contentId=59
Five of the six old Allen foundations are profiled by Access Philanthropy.
For a profile of the Allen Foundation for the Arts, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Forest Protection Foundation, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Foundation for Medical Research, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Foundation for Music, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Virtual Education Foundation, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Forest Protection Foundation, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Foundation for Medical Research, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Foundation for Music, click here.
For a profile of the Allen Virtual Education Foundation, click here.
Susan Buffett Dies8/21/04 -- On July 29, Susan Buffett, president of the Buffett Foundation, women's rights advocate, and spouse of the second wealthiest man in America, Warren Buffett, died of a stroke in Wyoming. Her family announced that she had left $2 billion to the Buffett Foundation, the largest of the family's four philanthorpies. Although it will take more than a year for the money to be adjudicated, once it is released, the Buffett Foundation will join the ranks of the largest 20 foundations in America.
The Buffett Foundation has two strong interests: Nationally, the foundation is interested in reproductive rights & services for women. In its hometown of Omaha, NE, the foundation is interested in providing college scholarships to local high school students and supporting youth and young adult related institutions.
For a profile of the Buffet Foundation, click here.
Terese Heinz Kerry Foundations7/30/04 -- Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of the Democratic presidential nominee, Senator John F. Kerry, chairs the Heinz Family Foundation and the Howard Heinz Endowment. She is also a trustee of the Vira I. Heinz Endowment.
The Heinz Endowments are comprised of two private foundations, the Howard Heinz Endowment and the Vira I. Heinz Endowment. Their shared mission is to help southwestern Pennsylvania thrive as a whole community—economically, ecologically, educationally, and culturally—while advancing the state of knowledge and practice in the fields in which they work.
The two endowments share, goals, staff, grantees, grant cycles, grantees, interest areas, geographic priorities, funding procedures and overlapping trustees, including Teresa Heinz Kerry. Among the largest independent philanthropic organizations in the country, the Heinz Endowments approved more than $54 million in grants to nonprofit organizations in 2003, down from $60 million in 2002.
In addition to the endowments, the family supports the Heinz Family Foundation which has overlapping goals and trustees, but awards considerably less funding than the endowments, has its own staff, is less geographically focused on southwestern PA, and is primarily known for its individual grants known as the Heinz Awards. The awards, established in 1992 to honor Teresa's late husband, are the primary activity of the family foundation. The awards recognize individuals for their contributions in the areas of arts and humanities, the environment, the human condition, public policy, and technology and the economy.
In addition to the individual awards, the Foundation also awards 150 grants to environmental groups, arts organizations, museums, human service agencies, and education institutions, primarily in the Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania area.
For a profile of the Heinz Family Foundation, click here.
For a profile of the Howard Heinz Endowment click here.
For a profile of the Vira I Heinz Endowment, click here.
Molson-Coors Merger Talks7/20/04 -- Canadian-owned Molson Inc. and Golden, Colorado-based Coors Brewing announced they were opening merger discussions. It may take months, if not years for the merger to come about. For a profile of Molson Foundation click here.
For a profile of Coors Brewing Corporate Giving Program click here.
Abbott Laboratories Criticized for Grant to Harm Reducation Coalition7/15/04 -- Major pharmaceutical companyAbbott Laboratories recently came under fire from an anti-drug group and U.S. Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) for awarding a grant to a pro-drug legalization organization. In 2003, Abbott gave $17,000 to the Harm Reduction Coalition (HRC). HRC believes that "illicit drug use is part of our world and chooses to minimize its harmful effects rather than…condemn them." Abbott was also listed as a sponsor of HRC’s 5th National Harm Reduction Conference, to be held in New Orleans next November. But in response to criticism by the Drug Free America Foundation, Abbott said it was incorrectly listed as a sponsor and told HRC to remove its name as a conference sponsor. For a description of Abbott Laboratories Fund click here.
Worldwide Muslim Fund to Launch -- Expects $10 Billion in 10 YearsNovember 16 2009 Global Muslim Fund Launched
The first fund dedicated to managing the charitable donations of Muslims plans to launch early next year and hopes to raise $750 million from high-net-worth donors during its first twelve months, Reuters reports.
Initiated by the Malaysian government, the World Zakat Fund is scheduled to launch during the first quarter of 2010 and hopes to start awarding grants within a year of its launch.
The fund currently has $50 million in commitments, and hopes to grow to $10 billion over the next ten years. Targeted donors 40,000 high-net-worth individuals in the Middle East, including four hundred billionaires in the Middle East/North Africa region.
Muslims are expected to pay zakat, typically 2.5% of any savings accumulated within a year. The funds tend to be used to help those in poverty or debt, or refugees.
Grantmaking will probably target microfinance activities in rural areas, and religiously-compliant liquid investments. The fund also plans to invest in social projects in the areas of health, clean water provision, education, and housing.
There are at least 10 faith-motivated Islamic private family foundations in the US. Here are profiles of two of the more established US funds.
For a profile of the Ansari Family Foundationclick here.
For a profile of the Khaki Foundationclick here.
Funders on TwitterDecember 21 2009 130 Funders (and counting) on Twitter
Our friends at Philanthropy 411 Blog have put together at list of 130 grantmakers, foundations, and philanthropoids who are on Twitter. Our webpage doesn't allow us to provide live links. But here are the funders, people and their twitter addresses.
130 Foundations on Twitter
Alaska Community Foundation (Anchorage, AK) @AKCommunity
The Allstate Foundation* (Northbrook, IL) @clicktoempower
American Institute for Cancer Research* (Washington, DC) @aicrtweets
Australian Cancer Research Foundation* (Sydney, Australia) @Cancer_Research
Alexander Abraham Foundation* (New York, NY) @aabrahamfound
Annie E. Casey Foundation (Baltimore, MD) @AnnieECaseyFndn
Anthony Robbins Foundation (San Diego, CA) @AR_foundation
Armstrong County Community Foundation (Kittanning, PA) @ACCF
Ashoka* (Arlington, VA) @AshokaTweets
AshokaTech* – Ashoka’s Technology Blog (Arlington, VA) @AshokaTech
Ashoka’s Changemaker program* (Washington, DC) @Changemakers
Ashoka’s YouthVenture program* (Arlington, VA) @AshokaGenV
Atlantic Philanthropies (New York, NY) @atlantic
Baltimore Community Foundation (Baltimore, Maryland) @baltcommfdn
Black Benefactors* (Washington, DC) @BlkBenefactors
Black Card Circle Foundation (Los Angeles, CA) @BCCF
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Seattle, WA) @gatesfoundation
The Bonnie J. Addario Lung Cancer Foundation* (San Francisco, CA) @a_breath_away
Bridge Builders Community Foundations (Oil City, Pennsylvania) @BBCF
The Broad Foundation (Los Angeles, CA) @BroadFoundation
Carl B & Florence E. King Foundation (Dallas, TX) @kingfoundation
Carnegie Corporation of New York* (New York, NY) @CarnegieCorp
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Stanford, CA) @CarnegieFdn
Case Foundation (Washington, DC) @CaseFoundation
Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation (Tulsa, OK) @clsff
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation (Flint, MI) @mottfoundation
Chicago Foundation for Women (Chicago, IL) @ChiFdn4Women
The Cleveland Foundation (Cleveland, OH) @CleveFoundation
Coastal Community Foundation of South Carolina (Charleston, SC) @GeorgeStevens
The Colorado Health Foundation* (Denver, CO) @COHealthFDN
Columbia Foundation* (Columbia, MD) @ColumbiaFdn
The Columbus Foundation (Columbus, OH) @colsfoundation
The Community Foundation Boulder County (Bolder, CO) @CommFound
Community Foundation for Calderdale (Halifax, UK) @CalderdaleFound
The Community Foundation for Greater Buffalo (Buffalo, NY) @CFGB
Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan* (Detroit, MI) @cfsem
Community Foundation for Southern Arizona* (Tuscon, AZ) @SoAZCommunityFd
The Community Foundation for Southwest Washington (Vancouver, WA) @CFSWW
Community Foundation for The Fox Valley Region (Appleton, Wisconsin) @CFFoxValley
The Community Foundation in Jacksonville* (Jacksonville, FL) @CJacksonville
The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham (Birmingham, AL) @comfoundbham
The Community Foundation of Sarasota County* (Sarasota, FL) @NonprofitSRQ
Community Foundation of Medicine Hat & Southeastern Alberta (Alberta, Canada) @CFMH
The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee (Nashville, TN) @CFMT
The Community Foundation for Palm Beach & Martin Counties* (West Palm Beach, FL) @cfpmbc
Community Foundation of South East Kansas (Pittsburg, KS) @CFSEK
The Community Foundation of The Lowcountry (Hilton Head Island, SC) @cflowcountry
Community Shares of Milwaukee* (Madison, WI) @MKEshares
Community Shares of Minnesota* (St. Paul, MN) @changeisbetter
Community Shares of Wisconsin* (Madison, WI) @CommSharesWI
Crossroads Community Foundation (MetroWest area of Massachusetts) @CCFDN
The Dale Jr. Foundation (Mooresville, NC) @tdjf
Dallas Social Venture Partners (Dallas, TX) @DallasSVP
Detroit Foundation (Detroit, MI) @dfoundation
EchoingGreen* (New York, NY) @echoinggreen
Eychaner Foundation (Des Moines, IA) @eychanerfndn
Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation (Kansas City, MO) @KauffmanFDN
Flinn Foundation (Phoenix, AZ) @biozonanews
Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation* (Morristown, NJ) @grdodge
GivenGain Foundation (Switzerland) @GivenGain
GlobalGiving* (Washington, DC) @globalgiving
Grand Rapids Community Foundation (Grand Rapids,MI) @GRCommFound
The Greater Cincinnati Foundation (Cincinnati, OH) @GrCinciFdn
Greater Kansas City Community Foundation (Kansas City, MO) @gkccf
The Greater Saint John Community Foundation (St. John, New Brunswick) @GSJCF
Gulf Coast Community Foundation of Venice (Venice, FL) @GulfCoastCF
Hawaii Community Foundation (Honolulu, HI) @HCFHawaii
Headwaters Foundation for Justice* @HeadwatersFdn
HealthCare Foundation of Greater Kansas City (Kansas City, MO) @HCF4KC
The Hopi Foundation (Kykotsmovi, AZ) @Hopi_Foundation
Horizons Foundation (San Francisco, CA) @horizonsfdn
The James Irvine Foundation* (San Francisco, CA) @IrvineFdn
The Jenzabar Foundation* (Boston, MA) @StudentsCare
Jolkona Foundation (Seattle, WA) @jolkona
Kansas Dental Charitable Foundation (Topeka, KS) @KSDentalFound
Kerstner Foundation (El Segundo, CA) @KerstnerFDN
Knight Foundation (Miami, FL) @knightfdn
MacArthur Foundation (Chicago, IL) @MacFound
Make-A-Wish Foundation* (Phoenix, AZ) @WishAmerica
Micron Foundation (Boise, ID) @Micron_Giving
Milken Foundation (Santa Monica, CA) @Milken
The Moyer Foundation (Seattle, WA) @MoyerFoundation
Ms Foundation (New York, NY) @outrageousacts
NASCAR Foundation (Charlotte, NC) @NASCAR_Foundat
New Profit* (Cambridge, MA) @newprofit
New York State Dental Foundation (Albany, NY) @NYSDF
One Star Foundation (Austin, TX) @onestarfdn
Open Society Institute (New York, NY) @OpenSociety
The Orphan Foundation (Southern CA) @TOF4Orphan
Oshkosh Area Community Foundation (Oshkosh, WI) @OACF
Peery Foundation (Palo Alto, CA) @davepeery
Pittsburgh Foundation (Pittsburgh, PA) @PittsburghFdn
Pride Foundation (Seattle, WA) @PrideFdn
Project Management Institute Educational Foundation* (Newtown Square, PA) @pmief
Rally Foundation (Sandy Springs, GA) @RallyFoundation
Reeve Foundation (Short Hills, NJ) @ReeveFoundation
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (Princeton, NJ) @rwjf
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Media Center (Princeton, NJ) @RWJF_mediacntr
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Pioneer Portfolio (Princeton, NJ) @pioneerrwjf
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Public Health Portfolio (Princeton, NJ) @RWJF_PubHealth
Rosa: The UK Fund for Women and Girls (London, UK) @RosaForWomen
The SAFE Foundation (United Kingdom) @SAFEFoundation
Saint Luke’s Foundation (Cleveland, OH) @saintlukesfdn
The Saint Paul Foundation & Minnesota Community Foundation* (Saint Paul, MN) @twofoundations
San Antonio Area Foundation (San Antonio, TX) @SAAFdn
Siemens Foundation (Iselin, NJ) @sfoundation
Sisters of Charity Foundation of South Carolina (Columbia, SC) @SCFSC
The Skillman Foundation* (Detroit, MI) @skillmanfound
Skoll Foundation (Palo Alto, CA) @SkollFoundation
Social Venture Partners Arizona* (Flagstaff, AZ) @tkwoganSVP
Social Venture Partners Boulder County (Boulder, CO) @svpboulder
Social Venture Partners Delaware (Wilmington, DE) @SVPDE
Social Venture Partners Portland (Portland, OR) @SVPPortland
Social Venture Partners San Diego (San Diego, CA) @SVPSanDiego
Social Venture Partners Seattle (Seattle, WA) @paulshoeSVP
Social Venture Partners Toronto (Toronto, Canada) @SVP_Toronto
The Stafford Foundation* (Washington, DC) @Staffordfnd
Sunlight Foundation (Washington, DC) @SunFoundation
Taproot Foundation (San Francisco, CA) @taprootfound
United Nations Foundation (Washington, DC) @unfoundation
United Nations Foundation – Vodafone Foundation’s Technology Partnership* (Washington, DC) @Tech4Dev
The V Foundation (Cary, NC) @TheVFoundation
Venture Philanthropy Partners (Washington, DC) @vppartners
West Central Initiative* (Fergus Falls, MN) @WCIMinn
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (Menlo Park, CA) @Hewlett_Found
William J. Clinton Foundation* (New York, NY) @ClintonTweet
WK Kellogg Foundation (Battle Creek, MI) @WK_Kellogg_Fdn
Women’s Giving Circle of Howard County* @WGCHowardCounty
The Women’s Foundation for a Greater Memphis (Memphis, TN) @WFGM_ORG
The Women’s Foundation of California (San Francisco, CA) @womensfoundca
May Department Stores Buys Marshall Fields from Target7/03/04. Recently Minneapolis-based Target Corporation announced the sale of its Marshall Fields division to The May Department Stores which has its headquarters in St. Louis.
Marshall Fields has stores in eight Midwestern states (MI, WI, IN, IL, OH, SD, ND, and MN). None of the initial information about the sale/acquisition discusses future plans for Marshall Fields’ corporate giving program.
The May Department Stores has centralized giving priorities which are administered by the public relations departments of its department store divisions (including such chains as Lord & Taylor, Filene’s, Famous-Barr, Hecht’s and Foley’s). The company has substantial commitments to United Way, higher education, general civic causes, and general health & human service agencies.
The giving policies of Target Corporation’s three primary divisions (Marshall Fields, Mervyn’s and Target Stores) vary slightly. However, all generally include giving programs for the arts, domestic violence, and human services agencies.
Currently, Marshall Fields’ specific giving priorities include Child Abuse Prevention, Youth Self-Sufficiency, Education through the Arts and Local Community Giving Priorities. Unless May Department Stores changes its current giving policies, Marshall Fields’ future giving practices will parallel those of the other May Department Store divisions. Like other May Company divisions, Marshall Fields’ giving office will be located at the company’s Minneapolis headquarters.
For Access Philanthropy’s corporate giving profile of May Department Stores click here.
For a description of Target's corporate giving program click here.
|
