Advertise on podcast: Philanthropisms

Send us Fan Mail In this episode we're joined by philanthropist Rory Brooks to talk about his giving and about a new project - The Giving Record - that he and Rhodri have been working on together, which aims to collect and share stories about what philanthropy looks like around the UK and the impact that it has. Including: What is the Giving Record, and how did the idea for the project come about?Why is  storytelling is so important when it comes to encouraging philanthropy?Why was the choice made to focus on stories from the point of view of the recipient organisations, rather than from the p.o.v. of donors/funders? What are some of the key messages about philanthropy that we hope come across through the stories collected for the Giving Record?What can people do to get involved?Does it take an unusual perspective for a philanthropist to focus some of their giving on trying to encourage more philanthropy as whole, or could more donors be encouraged to dedicate a bit of their giving towards this kind of work?What is the political and policy environment for philanthropy like in the UK right now?Is being known as a philanthropist something wealthy people are comfortable with?Further Resources: The Giving RecordRich Expectations: Why rich people give (Rhodri's 2025 book, co-authored with Beth Breeze)Philanthropisms podcast interviews with Sonal Patel, Kate Symondson, Craig Newmark and Ewan Kirk.WPM article on "3 currencies that are more important than money for philanthropy".

Send us Fan Mail In this episode we talk to Glen Galaich, CEO of Stupski Foundation about his new book Control: Why big giving falls short, why the 'mindset of control' is pervasive in elite philanthropy, and why that is a problem. Including: What is the mindset of control, and why is it so prevalent?What are the main problems this mindset gives rise to? Are there donors who have successfully rejected this mindset? If so, how, and what does that look like? Are we guilty as a society of conflating wealth with wisdom? How does the mindset of control lead to low levels of foundation payout?Is the process of giving power or control away necessarily uncomfortable?Should we view foundation assets as public, rather than private? How would this affect the ways in which we think about them?If philanthropy was done without taking advantage of tax breaks, would the same arguments still apply?Why is it important to scrutinise or critique philanthropy?What does writing a book like Control  teach you about how to frame critiques of philanthropy most effectively? Does the current climate, in which philanthropy and nonprofits feel under attack from external political critics (especially in the US), make people more defensive in response to insider critiques of the sort explored in the book?To what extent do foundations exist in perpetuity as a default, rather than an active choice?Would it be enough to shift this norm? (i.e. allow for foundations to be perpetual, but make that more of an opt-in/active choice than it is currently?)What should continue to give us hope about big giving's potential as a force for good in the world? What presents the biggest barrier to that hope?Further Resources: Buy a copy of ControlThe "Break Fake Rules" podcastStupski FoundationGlen's Who Gives?! SubstackGlen's interview for Alliance magazine earlier this yearPhilanthropisms podcasts episodes with Jen Ford Reedy; Renata Minerbo; Xanthe Scharff; élysse marcellin & Tesmerelna Atsbeha; Oli French & Sally Vivyan.WPM guides to short term vs long term funding and funding core costs.WPM long reads on "Why Isn’t All Philanthropy Trust-Based Philanthropy?" and "What’s The Point of Philanthropic Foundations? Part 3: Current Issues".

Send us Fan Mail In this episode we talk to Monica Stryker, the network coordinator of Foundations for Ukraine, about the role philanthropy has played during the ongoing war in Ukraine. Foundations for Ukraine is a global network of philanthropic organisations working in and with Ukraine, bringing together philanthropies from Australia, Ukraine, Europe and North America. The Network coordinates, convenes, supports learning and amplifies Ukraine on the global philanthropic agenda. It also supports the development of local philanthropy in Ukraine and traces how engagement in Ukraine is changing philanthropic practices in ways increasingly relevant in a world of growing and competing urgent demands. In the episode we discuss: What was the context for philanthropy and civil society in Ukraine prior to the war?Was there an increase in outside philanthropic support for Ukraine at the start of the war? Has this been maintained, or have we seen signs of donor fatigue?What types of sources has funding come from? (e.g. individuals, foundations, corporates?) Has support for Ukraine fit into the existing missions of foundations, or has it been seen as additional? How much philanthropic support is going to local Ukrainian organisation vs large INGOs?How much giving to Ukraine is bypassing traditional intermediaries and nonprofits – e.g. being given in the form of direct P2P gifts?How much domestic philanthropy has there been in Ukraine during the war?How have CSOs in Ukraine harnessed technology to drive donations?What needs is the funding being used to address? Is philanthropic support being used to pay for military resources as well as medical/humanitarian needs? Does the notion of ‘lethal aid’ test the boundaries of what we think of as philanthropy?Are there any practical challenges when it comes to getting funding to where it is needed?What have CSOs and philanthropy organisations in Ukraine done to adapt to the challenges of operating in a wartime context?Are there lessons for other funders and CSOs elsewhere? E.g. in terms of what civil society resilience looks like, or how we transition from operating in crisis mode to adapting to a new normal.Further Resources Foundations for UkraineUkrainian Community Foundations Are Protecting Local Ownership, Even in Wartime, blog for Johnson Center for Philanthropy by Viktoriia Zablotska Charitable giving in wartime: Evidence from Ukraine’s war fundraisingCitigroup blog, "Beyond Humanitarian Aid: Philanthropy Catalyzes Ukraine’s Recover"Philanthropisms podcast with Liv Egholm and Pia Gerber

Send us Fan Mail On this episode we hear from Michael Jarvis, Executive Director of the Trust, Accountability and Inclusion Collaborative, about the challenges and opportunities for global philanthropy in a post-USAID world. Including: How are funders responding to the withdrawal of USAID funding?Is there any sense in which this crisis also present an opportunity to make fundamental changes to our models of aid and development that many have been arguing for over many years?Why have we seen such remarkable growth in the scale and profile of Asian Philanthropy in recent years? What is driving this?Do the philanthropic norms, narratives and practices that are emerging in some of the new  centres of power in Asia differ from those that have dominated in the UK, US and Europe? In what ways?How much of the philanthropy that is emerging is domestically-focussed versus looking outwards? Will this change in coming years?Should Asian philanthropy have a larger voice in global development and governance conversations? Is Asian philanthropy currently more likely to be aligned with government priorities? What does this mean in terms of engaging with it?Where are we seeing other centres of philanthropic power emerge beyond Asia? How do these compare in terms of scale and characteristics?Is the landscape of global cross-border funding going to become much more genuinely global?Will this blur some of the boundaries that have traditionally been perceived between “donor” and “recipient” countries?What needs to be done to ensure that we maximise the value of future philanthropic globalisation?What is the relationship between transparency and trust? Is it as simple as “more transparency = more trust”, or is it more nuanced than that?When it comes to risk, is the role of an intermediary like TAI to reduce the risk for funders, or to help them shift their own risk tolerance so they can fund directly in future?Further Resources: TAIMichael's comment piece in Billionaire magazine, "In a Post-Aid World, Billionaires Must Lead the Way"Michael's piece in Professional Wealth Management, "Investing in the democratic dividend"Michael's piece for Alliance (with Yery Menendez Garcia), "The new frontlines of democracy"WPM article, "Philanthropy at a time of chaos"Philanthropisms podcasts with Emily Teitsworth; Dr Xanthe Scharff; Rachael Jarosh and Suzanne Ehlers;and Sarah Jeffrey, Victoria Tayler and Lonnie Hackett.

Send us Fan Mail On the fourteenth edition of our podcast partnership with the European Research Network on Philanthropy (ERNOP), we talk to more academics whose work is featured in the latest batch of short, practitioner-focused ERNOP Research Notes.  In this episode we hear from:   Marlene Walk (University of Freiburg), about her research on how we should understand the role of nonprofit consultants.Tine de Bock & Tine Faseur (KU Leuven), about research on the potential downsides of "charity checkouts" (aka point of sale donations)Silke Boenigk (University of Hamburg) & Laura Hesse (Bauhaus University Weimar), about their research into why non-donors don't give and how we can usefully segment them.Further Resources ERNOP's Research NotesMarlene's paper, "Not all wine and roses: Nonprofit consulting as nonprofit- sector-adjacent work" (with Amanda Stewart and Kerry Kuenzi), and the accompanying ERNOP research note by Michele Fugiel Gartner.Tine & Tine's paper, "Charity Checkouts: (Potential) Downsides for Customers, Nonprofits and Businesses Involved", and the accompanying ERNOP research note by Mårten Palmefors.Silke & Laura's paper "Unpacking the Non-Donor Segment: Reasons for Non-Support and Five Attitudinal Clusters Based on Data From the German Donation Monitor" and the accompanying ERNOP research note by Eva Sebbane.If you would like to contribute to making academic work accessible and more relevant for people working in, with or for philanthropy, then why not consider becoming an ERNOP practitioner expert and help translate academic work on philanthropy into research notes in close collaboration with the authors of the original work.  https://ernop.eu/information-for-practitioner-experts/ Or, if you or your organisation might be interested in supporting ERNOP’s wider mission to advance philanthropy research and make it accessible to those working in, with, and for philanthropy, then why not consider joining as a member:  https://ernop.eu/member-portal/subscription-plan/

Send us Fan Mail On this episode we talk to Jen Ford Reedy, President of the Bush Foundation, about her new book "Please Be Good At Philanthropy" and why it is important for grantmakers to turn good intentions into clear strategy. Including: Who is the title of the book aimed at? I.e. Who needs to be “good at philanthropy”?What does it mean to be good at philanthropy?Are our current narratives about what counts as success and failure in philanthropy creating barriers?Why is it so important not to lose sight of generosity a a guiding principle when working in institutional philanthropy?What kinds of biases or mindsets do people bring to philanthropy when they come from other sectors?What does a funder need to figure out in order to connect what they are trying to achieve with what they should be doing?Do funders too often fall into the trap of narrowing their focus too much or too quickly? Why is this a problem?Why is giving up control so fundamental for philanthropy?Do foundations have to accept the need to make choices? And that those choices necessarily mean picking certain organizations and cause areas over others?Why is “main character syndrome” a big risk for philanthropy?Is there too much emphasis on “working in gaps”, when it would actually be better for funders to work in the same areas to some extent? What is the difference between a “good failure” and a “bad failure” in philanthropy, and how foundations ensure that they have more of the former than the latter?Are there just “different ways of doing philanthropy” that are equally valid, or are some ‘better’ or ‘worse’ than others? What value can a historical perspective bring for philanthropists, funders and non-profit professionals?Further Resources: Please Be Good At Philanthropy launch page.Bush Foundation websiteJen on LinkedInInside Philanthropy interview with Jen. ($)"A Foundation President on How Not to Be a Lousy Funder", Chronicle of Philanthropy ($)Philanthropisms episodes with Emily Teitsworth, Philippa Charles, Sonal Sachdev Patel, and a deep dive on the history of foundations.WPM long reads on trust-based philanthropy and the history of foundations

Send us Fan Mail In this episode we hear from Isaac Jones, Director of the UK charity First Give, about their work in schools helping children and young people to become 'philanthropic citizens'. Including: What does First Give do, and how did the organisation come about?What does the program look like for a participant?Is the primary aim to get schoolkids to be more philanthropic, to teach them skills of civic participation/engagement, or to teach personal skills (e.g. presentation, confidence etc)? What is the balance of emphasis between these things?Where does the work that FG does fit within schools? E.g. Is it part of the curriculum, or extra-curricular?What impact does taking part in the program have on schools as institutions?Is the program the same across all schools, or is there room for it to be tailored to the specific needs of a particular school or the local context?Are there constraints on what participants can give to? (i.e. in terms of particular geographies, cause areas or types of organisations?)What role does personal experience tend to play in the choice of causes and charities that participants support?What is the response from recipient charities like? Do they view these donations differently or value them more because of how they have come about?Is “philanthropy” a helpful term when engaging young people, or does it cause confusion or bring connotations that might frame things in unhelpful ways?Do students who take part in FG demonstrate any increased engagement with their local area, or greater propensity to engage in associational life?How does taking part in affect students understanding of the charity sector?Do participant feel any better about the state of the world after taking part in the program? Do programs like First Give’s does have a role to play in addressing concerns about polarisation etc?Further Resources: First Give's websiteExternal evaluation report on First GiveIsaac's blog, "Giving Feels Good"Philanthropisms podcast episode on teaching philanthropy with Lindsey McDougle and David Campbell.Philanthropisms podcast episode with Natasha Friend and Maria Ahmed on participatory grantmaking

Send us Fan Mail In this episode we talk to Emily Teitsworth, Executive Director of the Honnold Foundation (the nonprofit set up by world-famous climber Alex Honnold), about trust, risk and the foundation's work supporting community-led climate work and low-cost solar projects. Including: How did the Honnold Foundation come about, and what is the organisation’s core focus ?How and why was low cost solar energy chosen as an intervention? What makes this so effective?What is the foundation’s operating model and where do its funds come from?Has it helped to have a high-profile founder in Alex Honnold? How does his involvement in the foundation work?Why is so little philanthropy currently aimed at climate issues? Do we need to stop seeing climate as a “cause area” and see it instead as a cross-cutting issue that affects all funders and civil society orgs?Is it a challenge for climate philanthropy that the needs of the planet are often framed as in competition with those of people? How can climate funders overcome this?What kind of due diligence do donors need to do on charities in order to fund them in a trust-based way?Can funding from donors/foundations confer legitimacy on grassroots orgs as well as financial resources? Is this useful for them?Is scaling about helping individual organisations to get bigger, or about growing the overall ecosystem?How can funders design impact measurement approaches with their grantees to ensure they are genuinely empowering and beneficial rather than imposing a new burden?Do we need a better narrative about what it means to “fail” and to “succeed” in philanthropy?Does Alex Honnold’s background as a climber gives him a unique understanding of risk, and how does this play into the work of the foundation?What role does storytelling and narrative have to play in addressing climate concerns? How is this reflected in Honnold Foundation’s approach? Is the current political moment posing challenges for organisations focussed on climate?Further Reading Honnold FoundationHonnold Foundation 2025 Impact ReportEmily's article for Alliance, "To build effective climate solutions, embrace human-centred design"Emily's article for Inside Philanthropy (with Suzanne Singer), "Trust-Based Philanthropy Is the Key to a Just Transition"Emily and Alex Honnold on the Invested in Climate podcastWPM article, "Why Isn't All Philanthropy Trust-Based Philanthropy?"Philanthropisms podcasts with Renata Minerbo, Edouard Morena, Joshua Amponsem and Ewan Kirk.

Send us Fan Mail On this episode we hear from Renata Minerbo, co-founder and Head of Philanthropy at Be The Earth Foundation, a family foundation focussed on the environment and social justice. Including: How did Be The Earth come about?How does Be The Earth implement a trust-based approach to grantmaking?How do you ensure that a trust-based approach doesn’t risk becoming exclusionary? (i.e. that you aren’t limiting your scope to organisations and individuals you already know and trust, but constantly widening the circle?)Why is it so important for Be The Earth that investments are made according to the same principles that drive philanthropic work?What does it mean to have a “closed loop” model of investing? Is it always straightforward to decide whether to support something as an investment or as a grant? How do you decide in edge cases?How can donors/funders approach their work with a suitable degree of humility?How can funders and nonprofits overcome the scarcity mindset themselves, and how can they help the organisations they fund to do so? Is it helpful to talk about Next Gen philanthropy?How can philanthropic funders collaborate with each other more effectively?How does Be The Earth use pooled funds as a way of achieving its mission? Why is convening events and gatherings such an important part of Be The Earth’s work?What is flow funding and how does it work? Further Resources: Be The Earth Foundation"How Can Wealth Regenerate Ecosystems?"Be Hive London and Be Hive Cape WinelandsBe The Earth's impact investmentsWPM, "Three currencies that are more important than money for philanthropy" and "Why Isn’t All Philanthropy Trust-Based Philanthropy?"Philanthropisms podcasts featuring élysse marcellin & Tesmerelna Atsbeha; Sonal Patel; Natasha Friend and Maria Ahmed; and Kate Symondson.

Send us Fan Mail On this episode we are joined by Dr Xanthe Scharff, Managing Director for External Affairs and Editor-at-Large at the Freedom Fund, to discuss their work combatting modern slavery and what it is like to receive not one but two major gifts from Mackenzie Scott. Including: What is Freedom Fund’s mission, and how does it go about delivering on this?What is the scale of modern slavery as an issue? How much philanthropic funding does modern slavery currently attract? How did the original Mackenzie Scott gift come about? ($35m in 2021).How did the second gift then come about? Was there any difference in process from the first gift?What have the gifts from Mackenzie Scott enabled Freedom Fund to do that it otherwise would not have been able to do? Freedom Fund chose to spend the $60m it received from Mackenzie Scott, rather than creating an endowment – what was the thinking behind this?How do you balance increased support for existing partners against the need to expand your work by finding new partners?Will the funding from Mackenzie Scott make it easier or harder to leverage further philanthropic funding? How does the Freedom Fund work as a collaborative/pooled fund?Do collaborative funds make it easier for donors to fund things that they might otherwise deem “too risky”?When it comes to risk, is the role of an intermediary like Freedom Fund to reduce the risk for funders, or to help them shift their own risk tolerance so they can fund directly in future?Are there challenges in the current political moment when it comes to working on an issue like modern slavery, which overlaps with highly politicised issues around immigration?Have wider attacks on the legitimacy of nonprofits and philanthropy have an effect on Freedom Foundation’s work?Further Resources: Freedom Fund"How MacKenzie Scott channeled $4 billion via collaboratives", Devex"MacKenzie Scott Gave us $60m. We're Giving it Away", Chronicle of PhilanthropyWPM article, "MacKenzie Scott & the History of Challenging Philanthropy’s Status Quo"Philanthropisms podcast episodes with Rachael Jarosh & Suzanne Ehlers; Elizabeth Barajas-Román; and Sara Lomelin.

Send us Fan Mail In the thirteenth edition of our podcast partnership with the European Research Network on Philanthropy (ERNOP), we talk to more academics whose work is featured in the latest batch of short, practitioner-focused ERNOP Research Notes.  In this episode we hear from:  Lauren Dula (Binghamton University, State University of New York) & Laurie Paarlberg (Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, Indiana University), about their research into the literature on how power manifests in philanthropic foundations.Marius van Dijke (Nottingham Trent University) about his paper (with Gijs van Houwelingen) looking at the impact that cognitive abstraction has on prosocial behaviour.Oto Potluka (University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague) about his research (with Lenka Svecova, Eva Blahova & Natasa Diatkova) on whether formal and informal volunteering compete for engaged individuals.FURTHER RESOURCES ERNOP's Research NotesLauren & Laurie's paper, "Philanthropic Foundations and the Exercise of Power: An Integrative Literature Review of the Many Faces of Power", and the accompanying ERNOP research note by Jemima ChanaMarius's paper, "Cognitive abstraction increases prosociality when loyalty is valued lowly, but decreases prosociality when loyalty is valued highly", and the accompanying ERNOP research note by Gerlad Czech.Oto's paper, "Do Formal and Informal Volunteering Compete for Engaged Individuals?", and the accompanying ERNOP research note by Ashifa Agede.If you would like to contribute to making academic work accessible and more relevant for people working in, with or for philanthropy, then why not consider becoming an ERNOP practitioner expert and help translate academic work on philanthropy into research notes in close collaboration with the authors of the original work.  https://ernop.eu/information-for-practitioner-experts/ Or, if you or your organisation might be interested in supporting ERNOP’s wider mission to advance philanthropy research and make it accessible to those working in, with, and for philanthropy, then why not consider joining as a member:  https://ernop.eu/member-portal/subscription-plan/

Send us Fan Mail On this episode we are joined by Craig Newmark - founder of Craigslist, philanthropist and recent Giving Pledge signatory - to discuss his thoughts on the importance of philanthropy and how he approaches it. Including: What was it that particularly made him decide to sign the Giving Pledge last year, given that he has been doing philanthropy at a significant level for a long time now?Part of Craig's stated aim in signing the Giving Pledge is to “inspire really rich people to pony up some dough” – is this something he is planning on doing primarily by example, or in other ways too?Why were his Sunday School teachers and Leonard Cohen both important in shaping his thinking about giving and responsibility?Why is a desire to “defend the country” a key common thread in Craig's philanthropy, and what are the different ways that manifests?Can it be a challenge these days to be patriotic in a way that isn’t seen as partisan or nationalistic? Is it important to use philanthropy to model a ‘good’ version of patriotism?In his Giving Pledge letter Craig wrote that“My most effective approach to addressing a manageable number of needs is to build a network of networks of people who know how to get the job done on stuff I care about….I find the group, fund them, nudge them to work together, and get out of the way.” So how does he find the people who know how to get the job done, and what does it mean to “get out of the way?”Why has cybersecurity and fighting online scams become such a big area of focus? Are there other philanthropists or funders working in this area? Do we need more? What was it that originally drove Craig's interest in supporting journalism through his philanthropy? How has that evolved?Where did his interest in support for military veterans and their families come from?What is the most important lesson he has learned about philanthropy?  Further Resources Craig Newmark PhilanthropiesCraig and Eileen Newmarks' Giving Pledge letterChronicle of Philanthropy, "Craigslist Founder Signs Giving Pledge and Narrows Focus"Nieman Lab, "Craig Newmark explains why he’s pulling back on funding journalism"Fortune, "Craigslist founder signs the Giving Pledge, and his fortune will go to military families, fighting cyberattacks—and a pigeon rescue"Inside Philanthropy, "Why Craig Newmark Is Concerned — and Hopeful — for American Democracy"WPM article "When Nobody Knows You’re a Dog: Tech, Civil Society, and the Fight for Authenticity"Philanthropisms podcast with Jonathan Heawood

Send us Fan Mail In the third and final episode of our "Myths of Philanthropy" series, Rhodri and Chiara are joined by Zaineb Mohammed (Kataly Fund) and Devi Leiper O'Malley (Closer Than You Think) to discuss individualism and scarcity. Including: What does it mean to have a scarcity mindset, and why is it so common in the nonprofit sector?What does a scarcity mindset lead to?How can funders and nonprofits overcome the scarcity mindset themselves, and how can they help the nonprofits they fund to do so? (E.g. by giving big grants up front, removing restrictions, working over longer timescales etc.)Is there too much competition and not enough collaboration in the nonprofit sector? Why is this?Is the emphasis on competition a legacy of modern institutional philanthropy’s roots in capitalism?How can we design better approaches? What kinds of resources and infrastructure will this require?Can organisational identity be a barrier to effective collaboration?Is the idea that foundations need to exist in perpetuity a reflection of a scarcity mindset? If so, how?Does adopting an abundance mindset make it easier to consider spending down?Why does the myth of the “philanthropic lone hero” (i.e. individuals or ogranisations working alone to solve complex social issues) continue to be so pervasive?Is part of the challenge that we find stories about individuals more compelling than ones about systems, so there is a tendency to frame things in terms of the former?How can we effectively recognise the role individuals play whilst at the same time emphasising the importance of the collective?Further Resources: Zaineb's "Myths of philanthropy" essay, "Leaning Into Abundance: What If Philanthropy’s Potential Wasn’t Limited by Manufactured Scarcity?"Devi's "Myths of Philanthropy" essay (with Ruby Johnson and Swatee Deepak), "Solidarity Leadership: What If Philanthropy Encouraged Collaboration Rather Than Competition? "Kataly Foundation Closer Than You Think

Send us Fan Mail For the second episode in our "Myths of Philanthropy" series, we are joined by élysse marcellin (Whose Knowledge?) and Tesmeralna Atsbeha (philanthropic strategist & advisor, formerly Wellspring Philanthropic Fund) to discuss presumed knowledge. Including: Why do we equate wealth with expertise across a broad range of domains, and why is this a mistake? Do we also make judgements about those who do not have money (i.e. that they have less knowledge or less capacity to absorb funding)?To what extent does the way in which a wealthy donor has made their money inform and shape their view about the role of philanthropy and how to practice it?How can donors approach their philanthropy with a suitable degree of humility?Are those who work in foundations also guilty of equating their position in relation to wealth with expertise in addressing issues? How can we get out of this mindset?Does this require understanding and re-evaluating our own attitudes to money?Does prioritisation of certain kinds of knowledge act as a barrier in philanthropy? How is this reflected in grant application processes, funding decisions etc?What role does language play in marginalising certain forms of knowledge (especially indigenous knowledge)?What does it look like for a philanthropic organisation to demonstrate that it genuinely values a wide range of different forms of knowledge?Further Resources:  élysse's "Myths of Philanthropy" essay (with Cassie Denbow and Anasuya Sengupta), If You Know You Know: What If Philanthropy is Mistaking Wealth for Expertise?Tesmerelna's "Myths of Philanthropy essay", Reconsidering Our Relationship to Power: What If Philanthropy’s Greatest Resource Isn’t Financial but Relational Capital?Liberatory Archives and Memory, a project by Whose knowledge?WPM articles, "Three currencies that are more important than money for philanthropy" and "Language Barriers"

Send us Fan Mail In the first episode of our mini-series on "Myths of Philanthropy", Rhodri and Chiara are joined by Lisa Cowan (Director of The Haven Fund, previously Vice President of the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation) and Dimple Abichandani (author of A New Era of Philanthropy: Ten Practices to Transform Wealth Into a More Just and Sustainable Future)  to discuss the notion of legacy. Including: To what extent do foundations exist in perpetuity as a default, rather than an active choice?Would it be enough to shift this norm?Is there evidence that next generation philanthropists take a different view of perpetuity than previous generations?Is this likely to lead to more limited-life foundations being created in future, or more perpetual foundations shifting to a spend down approach?Are there valid arguments in favour of longevity?Are there ways of getting longevity without perpetual endowments? To what extent is adherence to perpetuity driven by funders taking an individualistic perspective?  Why is it important to understand the historic roots of the wealth, institutions and practices we have in philanthropy?What should philanthropic organisations do about links to historic injustices? Is it enough to acknowledge them, or do they need to go beyond that and seek means to make reparations somehow? What role did Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth” play in justifying extractive or harmful business practices on the grounds that good would be done through philanthropy with the proceeds?Is philanthropy inherently a symptom of structural inequality and injustice, and does this limit its ability to be part of the solution to these challenges? Or are there forms of philanthropy that can be genuine tools for furthering equality and justice, and what do these look like?Does a reparative approach to philanthropy require a fundamental rethink of what we mean by “effectiveness” or “success”?What implications might taking a reparative approach have for the governance of philanthropic funders? (i.e. in terms of who works in foundations and who is on the board?) Further Resources: Lisa's original Myths of Philanthropy essay, "A Path to Repair: What if Philanthropy Wasn’t About Giving Away Money, but Returning It?" Dimple's original  Myths of Philanthropy essay, "Spending Stories: What If We Moved from Perpetuity to Purpose?"Dimple's book A New Era of Philanthropy: Ten Practices to Transform Wealth Into a More Just and Sustainable Future)Lisa's websiteDimple's website