Giving Thought

In this episode we talk to Sharna Goldseker and Michael Moody about their book Generation Impact: How Next Gen Donors are Revolutionizing Giving, which is now available in an updated and expanded 2nd edition. Including:   In what ways are Next Gen donors genuinely different from previous generations? Do Next Gen donors give to significantly different causes than their parents' generation, or simply give to the same causes but in different ways? Are Next Gen donors more likely to adopt non-traditional vehicles for their giving? If so, what does this tell us about the limitations of current non-profit models? Do Next Gen donors tend to seek advice on their giving (either at the outset, or on an ongoing basis)? If so, who do they turn to? Whilst almost all Next Gen donors agree that they “want to see the impact of their giving”, what they mean by “impact” varies considerably- some looking for rigorous metrics and outcome measure, others for human interaction or compelling stories. How can nonprofits cater effectively to these differing notions of impact? Are Next Gen donors more likely to take a holistic view of philanthropy, in relation to how wealth is created, how it is invested etc? What does this mean in practical terms? What are the key differences between inherited and earned wealth and how do they influence approaches to philanthropy? What role does philanthropy play in the planning of wealth transfer within families? (E.g. is philanthropy seen as a tool for engaging the younger generation in the family's financial affairs? What sorts of roles are Next Gens playing with regard to their family's giving?) Are Next Gen donors more likely to want to blur the boundaries between philanthropy and political activity in order to pursue their aims? Is the desire for more “hands-on” engagement from Next Gen donors an opportunity to tap into additional skills, or does it present a new challenge in terms of awkward power dynamics? (I.e. is there a danger of Next Gen donors assuming that their knowledge is “better/more important” than that of people working in nonprofits, simply because of the power dynamics that come with funding?) Should we worry that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on Next Gen donors' willingness to give?   Related content: More detail on the book from Sharna's 21/64 website Excerpt of 1st edition of Generation Impact in SSIR More on Next Gen philanthropy from the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy

In this episode we talk to Stelio Stefanou OBE, philanthropist and Founder of the For Baby's Sake Trust (FBST) - a charity which focuses on working with parents to address the impact of domestic violence on the early years development of children. In a wide-ranging conversation, we discussed:   Is “philanthropist” a helpful or unhelpful word? How does a business background shape approaches to philanthropy? Why is it important to recognise that success in business doesn't automatically equate to expertise about social issues or the work of charities? Why is an evidence base so crucial to the work of FBST? How has the organisation worked with academics to build that evidence base? How important is it that philanthropy looks beyond addressing symptoms and tries to address underlying causes? Are there challenges to combining advocacy with direct provision of services, or do the two naturally go hand-in-hand? How has the pandemic affected the work of FBST? What, if anything, is the USP of philanthropy in relation to the public or private sector? Does the ability of philanthropy to work over a longer time horizon make it better suited to supporting early interventions? Do you see yourself as having any responsibility to encourage other wealthy people to give, or is giving entirely down to personal choice? Should philanthropists see themselves as having any responsibility to encourage other wealthy people to give, or is giving entirely down to personal choice? Is there a danger that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on people's willingness to give? Des fear of “failure” hold some wealthy people back from engaging in philanthropy? How should we understand failure in philanthropy (and how is this different to failure in the public or private sector?)   Related Links: For Baby's Sake Trust website Info on FBST's approach to influencing Giving Thought podcast with Jo Kerr and Sonya Ruparel

In this episode Rhod sat down with Gemma Bull and Tom Steinberg, authors of new book "Modern Grantmaking: A Guide for Funders Who Believe Better is Possible". In a wide-ranging conversation, we discussed:   Humility & Funder Ego Why is humility such a key part of Modern Grantmaking? Is part of the problem that traditionally our idea of what it means to be “good at grantmaking” has revolved around attributing genius to funders and grantmakers in terms of their choices/program design, rather than on the extent to which they nurture grantees? Do we need to redefine what counts as success and failure in grantmaking? Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Does grantmaking have a diversity problem? Are funders more effective when they reflect more closely the people and communities they serve? In what ways can they achieve this? Do some grantmaking practices exclude people from already-marginalised communities? (E.g. focus on the written-word, invitation-based grantmaking etc.) Privilege & Power Is traditional grantmaking paternalistic, and too often about decisions being made about communities rather than by them? The book emphasises that modern grantmakers should see themselves as serving the people and communities they fund– what does this mean in practice? Why is it so important for grantmakers to check their privilege, and what does this mean in practice? How do you navigate power dynamics within a grantmaking org- e.g. between trustees and grantmakers, or between philanthropic donors and the staff of a foundation? Participation & Movements There is a growing amount of focus on participatory approaches to grantmaking at the moment as part of the solution to the criticisms being levelled at philanthropy. How much of the rhetoric is reflected in reality? Would all grantmaking be participatory in an ideal world? Or are there limits to participatory approaches? i.e. are there some situations in which it is better for expert funders to set aims and design programs? Or are there cause areas in which participatory approaches are not suitable for other reasons? Would it help if more funders supported grassroots organisations and movements? Funding practices Are there signs that funders are changing their behaviour during the current crisis? (Moving to unrestricted funding, trust-based grantmaking etc.) Is this likely to lead to longer-term changes? Risk and Innovation Many have argued that a key function of philanthropic funding is to drive society forward by taking risks and funding things that the state and market cannot – but how much current philanthropic grantmaking do you think meets this criterion? Is there a danger that “being innovative” becomes an end in itself, and results in continual chasing after shiny new things, rather than funding things that are already known to work? Evidence and Impact The book argues that modern grantmaking requires more of a focus on evidence-based decisions- what kinds of evidence should grantmakers be considering? Do we need to ensure that different kinds of evidence and expertise are considered equally, in order to avoid perpetuating inequalities? What role can data play in making grantmaking more effective and equitable?     Related Links: Modern Grantmaking- the book The Grant Givers Movement Giving Thought podcast with Meg Massey & Hannah Paterson Giving Thought podcast with Nell Edgington Giving Thought podcast with Fozia Irfan

In this episode we're joined by Lori Bezahler, President of the Edward W. Hazen Foundation, to discuss the role of philanthropy in supporting racial justice and funding grassroots organizing or social movements. Including:   Racial Justice Is racial injustice such a big/cross-cutting issues that it should not be seen as a cause area, but rather as something that is the responsibility of ALL philanthropic funders and nonprofits? What does this mean in practice re racial justice issues? (E.g. supporting more grantees led by BIPOC leaders, promoting more BIPOC employees into positions of authority within foundations, acknowledging where philanthropic assets have been created in ways that exacerbated racial injustice, paying reparations etc?) Should we be optimistic that the current recognition of the need to apply a racial justice lens across philanthropy will be maintained?   The “Movement Moment” Is the current enthusiasm for social movements reflective of a frustration people have that traditional nonprofits have failed to move the needle on issues such as the climate crisis or racial justice? Is the fact that participation is inherent to the approach of social movements part of their appeal, as it gives people a greater sense of agency over problems that can seem insurmountable? Are traditional nonprofits and funders too often a reflection of existing systems and power structures to push for the kind of radical solutions we need to deal with huge global, structural challenges? Does the ability of social movements to be more overtly political, or to employ more challenging tactics (e.g. protest, direct action), give them an advantage over civil society organisations (CSOs) that might be more constrained by legal/regulatory requirements? Can movements that have grown to huge scale very quickly find that they are lacking some of the elements of organisations infrastructure that they might need if they are to be sustainable over the longer-term? If so, can traditional CSOs and nonprofits work with them to provide some of that infrastructure? Does this happen in practice?   Funding movements How can a funder determine where best to allocate their resources in order to support a movement most effectively? How big a risk is there that foundations and other funders co-opt social movements by deliberately introducing grant stipulations etc. aimed to direct the focus of the movement away from controversial areas or soften their tactics? Can funding from donors/foundations confer legitimacy on movements as well as financial resources? Is this useful for the movements? Can funders use their power positively on behalf of the movements they fund? Why is core-cost and multi-year funding so important when supporting movements? Are we seeing more funders recognise this and adapt the way they fund?   Spending Down The Hazen Foundation took the bold decision in 2019 to spend down its remaining endowment over 5 years. What was the rationale for doing this at this point, after nearly 100 years of operating? What is the foundation aiming to fund over the coming years to ensure the foundation leaves a strong legacy? Should more foundations should consider spending down?   Mission Related Investment Why did the Hazen Foundation decide to take a fully mission-related investment approach? What does this mean in practice? Does this involve going beyond screening to look for active opportunities to invest in activities that further the foundation's mission? How are trade-offs between financial return and social impact assessed?       Related Links:   The Edward W. Hazen Foundation Lori's Chronicle of Philanthropy opinion piece, “To Achieve Justice, Philanthropy Must Give Up Its Power” Lori's joint article with Lateefah Simon in Chronicle of Philanthropy, “How Foundations Can Grapple With the Reality That Their Wealth Was Accumulated Unjustly” Lori's piece for Inside Philanthropy, “Philanthropy Has a Duty to Respond Quickly to the COVID-19 Outbreak. Here's How We Can Do It” Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Regan Ralph Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Megan Ming Francis Rhod's Medium article, “Language Barriers: why the ways in which we talk about philanthropy & civil society are holding us back”

In this episode we talk to Jo Kerr and Sonya Ruparel, from UK charity Turn2Us, about poverty, participation and the impact of the pandemic. Including:   Impact of Covid Pandemic How has the Covid 19 pandemic affected Turn 2 Us, and the people and communities the charity serves? What are the biggest challenges for the organisation over the coming months and longer-term post-pandemic? Digital Transformation Has the necessity to adapt due to the pandemic accelerated Turn2Us's digital adoption or transformation at all? If so, how? How important is the collection and use of data to the charity's work? How is a focus on data incorporated into the organisation's strategy? To what extent is digital transformation about employment practices rather than technology? (E.g. flexible/remote working, making charity work more appealing than private or public sector). Has the pandemic presented an opportunity in this regard? How might the charity workplace change over the next decade or so? What are the major barriers to the charity sector when it comes to engaging with and making use of technology? Poverty What, for Turn 2 Us, are the key areas of focus when it comes to tackling poverty? How have issues of poverty changed during the pandemic? Do particular communities or geographic localities face particular challenges when it comes to the impacts of poverty? How do you combine the specificity to address these particular challenges with the generality required to work at scale? Role of charities What is the core role of civil society which differentiates it from either state or market provision? A lot of the work of Turn 2 Us is about helping people to understand and claim rights and benefits provided by the state- so is it more about “justice” than “charity”? How should we view the balance between addressing the symptoms of poverty through direct services and addressing its causes through advocating for fundamental systemic reform? Participation & Power Turn 2 Us's approach is rooted in ideas of co-production and empowering those in need to determine their own solutions. Why is this so important? What should we make of approaches such as participatory grantmaking, which seek to shift power as well as money towards recipients? Will we see more of this in coming years? Infrastructure Has the Covid pandemic highlighted the importance of strong civil society infrastructure? What are the key elements of this infrastructure? How do we ensure that infrastructure is fit for the challenges of the future?   Related Links The Turn2Us website Independent article about Turn2Us new benefits calculator, “The new financial tools supporting those hit hardest by Covid” Rhod's Giving Thought blog on “Mutual Aid, Charity & Philanthropy” Rhod's Giving Thought blog on “Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future” Our Giving Thought podcast series on “Covid 19: Voices From Civil Society”          

In this episode we talk participatory approaches in philanthropy and social investment, with Meg Massey, co-author of “Letting Go: How Philanthropists and Impact Investors Can Do More Good by Giving Up Control” and Hannah Paterson, Senior Portfolio Manager at the National Lottery Community Fund. Including:   There is a growing amount of focus on participatory approaches to grantmaking at the moment as part of the solution to the criticisms being levelled at philanthropy. How much of the rhetoric is reflected in reality? If there is resistance to adopting participatory approaches, why is this? What's the core case for adopting participatory approaches: that it democratises philanthropy (and thus helps to answer various critiques) or that it results in better outcomes? Or is it both? What different kinds of models of participatory grantmaking are there? What kind of challenges are there for traditional grantmakers when it comes to bringing communities and people with lived experience into decision making processes? Do participants in a grantmaking decision process need to be representative of a wider community? If so, how do you select them to ensure that representation? How can existing grantmakers transition some or all of their grantmaking to participatory methods? Would all grantmaking be participatory in an ideal world? Or are there limits to participatory approaches? i.e. are there some situations in which it is better for expert funders to set aims and design programs? Or are there cause areas in which participatory approaches are not suitable for other reasons? Can participatory approaches be used outside traditional grantmaking too, e.g. in impact investing/social investment? Does the prominence of XR, BLM and other “new power” organisations suggest an unmet demand within civil society for participation and sharing power? What lessons should traditional CSOs and funders take from this? What should we make of criticisms that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution? Are some donors and funders recognise the challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change?   Related Links   Meg's new book (co-authored with Ben Wrobel) “Letting Go: How Philanthropists and Impact Investors Can Do More Good by Giving Up Control” Meg on Twitter Hannah's website Hannah on Twitter The Participatory Grantmaking community Meg and Ben's article for Pioneers Post “How philanthropists and impact investors can do more good – by giving up control” Meg and Ben's article for NonProfit Quarterly “Philanthropy and the Zen of Participation” Rhod's World Economic Forum article, “Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go” CAF Giving Thought podcast on participatory philanthropy with Rose Longhurst  

On this episode we talk to Teddy Schleifer, Senior Reporter, Money & Influence at Recode (part of the Vox Media group), about billionaires, Silicon Valley and philanthropy. Including: Silicon Valley Philanthropy Do most tech billionaires see their wealth as “self-made”, or do they recognise any sense of societal debt, luck etc? How does this shape their giving? How does the wider public view the philanthropy of modern tech billionaires? Are tech donors particularly prone to solutionism or a desire for “moonshots” in their philanthropy? Are many big tech donors happy with the idea of giving away power as well as money? Or are they likely to want to retain control of decision-making about their philanthropy? Does this make them any different to other big money donors? Are donors like Mackenzie Scott, who seem to be trying to shift power as well as financial resources through her philanthropy, merely outliers; or do they signal a wider trend?   Reporting on Philanthropy Why is it important to have journalists focussing on philanthropy? How do you balance focussing on the individual stories of philanthropists vs systemic issues about philanthropy as a whole? Is there an argument for more philanthropic funding of journalistic scrutiny of philanthropy? Could increased philanthropic funding of news media actually undermine journalism’s ability to hold philanthropy itself to account? (E.g. if outlets self-censor to avoid upsetting existing or potential patrons).   Critiques of Philanthropy Is there a danger that scrutiny can tip over into cynicism when it comes to philanthropy? Should we worry that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on people’s willingness to give? Of the current critiques levelled at philanthropy, which are potentially misguided or overstated, and which are genuinely important to heed? Do these critiques only really apply to big money/elite philanthropy?   Transparency in Philanthropy Do wealthy donors deliberately use philanthropy to deflect or preclude criticism of their business dealings, tax affairs etc, or are reputational benefits merely a side-effect of genuinely altruistic behaviour in some cases? Do foundations (and donors) need to be more transparent? If so, why and about what? Who does it benefit (the foundations themselves, their donors, grantees, taxpayers etc.) Should we be concerned about the growing trend for elite donors to use LLCs and other vehicles that may be less transparent?   Related Links Some of Teddy’s Recode articles: “What Americans really think about billionaires during the pandemic” Jeff Bezos will spend $1 billion a year to fight climate change America’s billionaire philanthropists gave away more during the pandemic. But there’s a catch MacKenzie Scott, the Amazon billionaire, is giving away $1 billion a month to charity Jeff Bezos plays it safe on his $10 billion climate giveaway CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Mackenzie Scott and the Reimagining of Philanthropy”. CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Jeff Bezos, Big Philanthropy and Climate Change” Rhod’s 2020 Alliance article “Bezos’ $10bn donation should not pitch philanthropy and taxation against each other – that would be a zero-sum game” Rhod’s 2018 Alliance article “Philanthropy should fund the media for its own sake”

In this episode we talk to Denis Mizne, CEO of Lemann Foundation - Brazil’s largest educational funder – about philanthropy in Brazil during the Covid-19 pandemic and the Lemann Foundation’s pivot to supporting vaccine trials in the country. Including: Vaccination How and why did Lemann Foundation get involved in Covid vaccine trials? How does this fit with the foundations normal focus on education and leadership, and will it result in any shift of focus longer-term? Is there a danger that ongoing controversies about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, and about the distribution of vaccines more broadly will have a knock-on impact on trust in philanthropy?   Education & Leadership How has the Covid pandemic affected education in Brazil and what has Lemann Foundation done in response? Will the pandemic have a lasting impact on children’s education in the country and how is the foundation adapting its strategy to reflect this? A key focus of Lemann Foundation’s funding is developing leadership- what is the theory behind this? Are their challenges when it comes to assessing the impact of leadership development, where timescales may be very long-term and outcomes may be widely dispersed and difficult to link to interventions? Are foundations uniquely well-placed to follow these kinds of long-term/upstream strategies?   Philanthropy in Brazil What does the landscape of philanthropy in Brazil look like? E.g. how much HNWI giving is there? How much mass market giving? What role does corporate philanthropy play? What role do foundations play? What kind of domestic causes receive philanthropic funding in Brazil? Is there any cross-border giving to other countries? What is the attitude of the Brazilian government towards civil society in general? What is the attitude of the Brazilian government towards philanthropy? What is the attitude of the Brazilian public towards philanthropy?   Philanthropy in Wider Context What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?  Do recent critiques of philanthropy in the US and elsewhere resonate in the Brazilian context? Why should we not see philanthropy as the “solution” to intractable social problems in isolation, and how do we get better cross-sector collaboration?       Related links https://fundacaolemann.org.br/en Denis’s Alliance Magazine article “Vaccination and collaboration: what we can achieve in a divided world” Denis’s Alliance magazine article “We must develop talent and leadership to meet the challenges of the post-Covid world” Interview with Denis about Lemann Foundation’s vaccine trial work in Alliance magazine (£) CAF’s Global Alliance partner in Brazil, IDIS CAF’s 2019 Brazil Giving report Rhod’s article for Stanford Social Innovation Review (with Paula Fabiani from IDIS) “Brazil’s New Endowment Law Could Strengthen Philanthropy and Democracy Around the Globe”

In this episode we talk to Andy Haldane, Chief Economist of the Bank of England about his long-standing interest in civil society, why he thinks it is so important yet undervalued, and what sort of challenges and opportunities the coming years may bring. We also have some analysis and additional insight from CAF CEO Neil Heslop. Including:   The economy and charitable giving If the UK economy is like a “coiled spring”, and once lockdown measures are relaxed we will see a significant bounce-back as people start to spend again, will we also see a corresponding rise in charitable giving? Are there any concerns that some charities will have lost operational and fundraising capacity as a result of the pandemic, and this might limit their ability to harness any increase in giving?   The Role of Civil Society What is the core role of the voluntary sector within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision? As the landscape for doing good appears to be expanding (with the emergence of mutual aid networks, digital social movements, purpose-led businesses, impact investing etc) do we need to make a renewed case for the unique value of charitable organisations? If so, what is that USP? Should we have any concerns that some of our models for engaging in civil society have become too transactional and thus may not be developing social capital in the way we might want?   Measurement Many argue that a major challenge facing civil society is that most current systems of measurement do not capture the full value of what charities and other civil society organisations do. What should we be measuring instead? Is this more about better measurement within civil society, or about changing the measures government uses (e.g. GDP) so that they capture a wider notion of value? Or is it both? What would this entail in practice? Are there potential risks in putting more emphasis on measurement? E.g. that any measures become targets and thus skew activity (a la Goodhart’s Law); or that the decision about who gets to set measures introduces problematic power dynamics?   Civil Society Narratives & Influence Andy has previously argued that “despite its crucial role, the social sector goes largely unnoticed in many policy discussions”- is this primarily due to the current lack of appropriate measurement, or are there wider issues when it comes to our understanding and narratives around civil society? How can we get better understanding and clearer narratives about civil society and its role in the minds of policymakers? Are there any practical barriers that are currently limiting the ability of civil society to “have a seat at the table” when it comes to policy discussions? What could we do to overcome these?   Infrastructure The pandemic has highlighted more starkly than ever how vital it is to have strong infrastructure in civil society. Where are the greatest weaknesses or biggest gaps in existing infrastructure that we need to address? How do we get government to think of social infrastructure alongside physical infrastructure? What might civil society infrastructure that is fit for the future (rather than based on the structures of the past) look like?   Digital Evidence suggest that the charity sector is currently lagging behind in its adaptation to digital technology. What are the key barriers preventing charities from harnessing digital? How can we address these? What more could be done to match the existing supply of skills and capacity around technology in the private sector with the potential demand in civil society. How might this work? What role would the private sector, government and the charity sector need to play in making it happen? Will the current period of enforced digitisation as a consequence of the COVID pandemic lead to more CSOs engaging with the opportunities and challenges of technology?   Civil Society in the 4th Industrial Revolution Civil society played a key role in previous periods of rapid social and technological change - by helping people and communities to navigate challenges and opportunities, and by speaking out against any unintended harms of progress. Is civil society in a position to play this vital role in the current Fourth Industrial Revolution? If not, why not? What do we need to do to strengthen civil society capacity in this regard? What are some of the biggest opportunities that emerging technology could bring for civil society? Could widespread automation lead to a blurring of the boundaries between our notions of work, volunteering and leisure? Will we need to adjust our understanding and narratives of civil society accordingly? Should civil society organisations make a case for their value as sources of knowledge and insight about the potential impacts of technology on people and communities, which can help to inform wider policy debates about technological development?     Related Links: Andy’s speech for the Pro Bono Economics 10th anniversary lecture, “The Third Pillar and the Fourth Industrial Revolution” FT, “Andy Haldane: Bring charities out of the technological dark ages” Civil Society, “Charities 'underestimated and overshadowed’ says Bank of England chief economist” Civil Society “Andy Haldane: Covid-19 has reinforced the values of community purpose and social solidarity” The Guardian, “Andy Haldane: ‘We have allowed the voluntary sector to wither’” Andy’s speech for Charity Finance Week 2020, “The Role of Charities in an Era of Anxiety” Andy’s slides for his 2020 lecture, “The Health, Wealth & Happiness of Nations” Mark Carney’s CAF Giving Thought podcast, “Philanthropy, civil society and COVID-19: what now, what next?” CAF’s “A Covid-19 Philanthropy Stimulus Package” policy paper, 2020 Rhod’s WEF article, “Where are the charities in the great AI debate?” Rhod’s Alliance magazine piece, “Riding the tiger of technological change”    

In this episode we talk to Nanjira Sambuli about technology, philanthropy and civil society. Nanjira is a researcher, policy analyst and advocacy strategist based in Nairobi, Kenya and in a fascinating and wide-ranging discussion we touched on: Digital civil society Is there any meaningful distinction between “civil society” and “digital civil society” now? I.e. is technology no longer something that should be seen as a cause area or a tool, but a cross-cutting factor that affects all CSOs? What dangers are there for CSOs in assuming that platforms are objective or neutral public spaces? Are these problems likely to be made worse by the enforced pivot to digital for so many orgs as a result of COVID? How do we link existing work by digital activists etc. to more traditional actors within civil society (e.g. foundations) that might be interested in engaging on technology issues?   Influencing the wider development & implementation of tech Can CSOs play a meaningful role in ensuring that tech is designed and implemented ethically? Is this even the right framing? Does the focus on “ethical” tech development beg the question of whether we should even do some of these things at all (and not just “do them ethically”)? Does it divert attention from the need for more traditional mechanisms of legislation and regulation? Do CSOs from the ‘global south’ face particular challenges when it comes to influencing the development of tech? What role can foundations and funders can play in helping nonprofits engage with technological change?   Power Dynamics What challenges do the inherent power imbalances between CSOs and tech companies create? Do power imbalances within civil society also pose challenges? (E.g. between funders and recipients, or between CSOs in the global north and those in the global south?) Do we need to make philanthropy more democratic, or accountable to the people and communities it is supposed to serve? If so, how?   Automation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution Should we take an optimistic or pessimistic view of the impact of technology on civil society? Should we be worried that CSOs and funders are not getting to grips with either the challenges or opportunities of the fourth industrial revolution? What role is there for CSOs in addressing the impact of algorithmic bias? Is such bias likely to affect CSOs themselves? If so, how?   The Future Role of Philanthropy in Society What should we make of criticisms that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of existing structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution? Are the donors and funders who recognise these challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change? Does the fact that a growing proportion of philanthropic wealth comes from donors who have made their money in tech present challenges when it comes to getting philanthropy to focus on the societal impacts of technology? E.g. Are these tech donors particularly prone to “tech solutionism” or more likely to assume the inevitability of technological development?   Predictions and Foresight in civil society: The pandemic has highlighted the importance of looking ahead to the future. How can we get more foresight and futures thinking embedded in civil society? What role could foundations and funders play? What role should civil society and philanthropic funders be playing in developing imagined futures that are informed by the voices of people and communities on the ground around the world?     Related links Nanjira on Twitter Nanjira’s recent article for WINGS, “On the Patient Capital Needed from Philanthropy in Tech”. Video of the WINGS Forum 2021 event on “Philanthropy and the Digital Revolution” that Nanjira and I were both involved in. “What is Digital Equality?” Interview with Nanjira Sambuli” in European Sting Rhod’s WEF articles, “Philanthropy is at a Turning Point: Here are 6 Ways it could go” and “Where are Charities in the Great AI Debate?” Our CAF Giving Thought podcasts with Lucy Bernholz and Cassie Robinson. Rhod’s 2018 Alliance article “Riding the Tiger of Technological Change”

In this episode we talk to Nell Edgington, President of non-profit consultancy Social Velocity, about her new book “Reinventing Social Change: Embrace Abundance to Create a Healthier and More Equitable World”. We discuss: What is the book about, who should read it and what should they do as a result? Why does a scarcity mind-set affect so many donors and funders? Is this particular to philanthropy? Why is the “overhead myth” so prevalent, and why is it so problematic? Are there signs that funders are changing their behaviour during the current crisis? (Moving to unrestricted funding, trust-based grantmaking etc.) Is this likely to lead to longer-term changes? What misconceptions are there about what makes for a sustainable non-profit, and why do these misunderstandings persist? How many donors are willing to give away power as well as money? (And will the current crisis put even more focus on approaches such as participatory grantmaking?) Do we need to redefine what counts as success and failure in philanthropy? How should we rate philanthropy’s response to the current crisis? What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision? Why has the idea that non-profits need to be “more business-like” become so widespread? What is wrong with it? Should we seek to measure impact better? What challenges might this bring in terms of distorting activity or creating power imbalances? How can donors and funders use philanthropy to challenge or transform the very systems in which wealth has been created?     Related Links   Nell’s book Reinventing Social Change Nell’s Social Velocity blog Rhod’s WEF article “Philanthropy is at a Turning Point: Here are 6 Ways It Could Go” CAF Giving Thought podcast with Phil Buchanan CAF Giving Thought podcast with Kris Putnam-Walkerly CAF Giving Thought podcast with Louise Pulford, Josiane Smith & Dame Julia Unwin CAF Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future”

In this episode we talk to Professor Sir David Cannadine about history, philanthropy and his forthcoming book on the history of the Ford Foundation. Among David’s many public roles he is Dodge Professor of History at Princeton University, President of the British Academy, Chair of Trustees of the National Portrait Gallery and a Trustee of the Wolfson Foundation; and in a wide ranging conversation we discuss:   Involvement in philanthropy: What insights has involvement with many charities, foundations and public institutions given about the strengths, weaknesses, challenges and opportunities of philanthropy? What value has historical insight brought to these practical roles? There is currently a lot of controversy over the commemoration of historical figures, including many philanthropic donors, as well as the sources of historical wealth. Why is it important for philanthropic organisations to engage with potentially problematic elements of their history, and how can they navigate some of the challenges this may bring?   Studying the History of Philanthropy: Do academic historians think in terms of charity or philanthropy as a standalone thematic area of study, or are they more likely to think of it in the context of a particular period or a wider theme (e.g. welfare)? If it is thought of as a thematic area in its own right, is it one that has been sufficiently well-studied? Is the study of the history of philanthropy (even in the UK) too US-focussed; dominated by the great industrial donors of the Gilded Age? Does this lead us to under-appreciate the UK’s own history of philanthropy? Does “archival inequality” mean that we end up focusing more on institutions and big name donors when we study history (as they tend to leave more records), at the expense of the huge numbers of ‘everyday’ donors whose giving may well go unseen? Does this skew our view of the development of philanthropy?   The History of the Ford Foundation: Why is it worth studying the role of an institution like the Ford Foundation? Is the history of the Ford Foundation merely the history of a single institution or does it bring to light wider truths about philanthropy? The history of the Ford Foundation contains many fascinating characters (e.g. McGeorge Bundy or Paul Ylvisaker). Is the role of these “philanthropoids” (i.e. people who work in foundations, rather than donors) an under-researched area of the history of philanthropy? The question of the relationship between foundations and social movements (especially in the context of racial justice) is once again a major area of debate. What, if anything, can we learn from the Ford Foundation’s experiences in this area, which have seemingly won both praise and criticism?   Related Links David’s introduction to Pellew & Goldman (ed) 2018, Dethroning Historical Reputations: Universities, Museums & The Commemoration of Benefactors Rhod’s blog for the British Academy, “Reshaping Philanthropy for the 21st Century” CAF Giving Thought blog, “Past Caring: Why Study the History of Philanthropy?” CAF Giving Thought blog, “Philanthropy and the Sins of the Pas: Statues, Slavery & Tainted Donations” CAF Giving Thought podcast on Tainted Donations CAF Giving Thought podcast with Paul Ramsbottom from the Wolfson Foundation CAF Giving Thought podcast with Ben Soskis Rhod’s book, “Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain”

In this episode we look at the relationship between sport, philanthropy and civil society through history and up to the present day. Including:   Sportspeople as donors Big name examples of sportspeople who give generously: David Beckham, Roger Federer, Cristiano Ronaldo, Serena Williams, Andre Agassi What drives this high-profile giving? Altruism, or brand-management/PR? Lance Armstrong and the potential risks of making philanthropy over-reliant on the individual Does the fact that many sportspeople’s careers end relatively early leave them searching for purpose, and can philanthropy fill that gap? Can philanthropy be partly motivate by a desire to create positive narrative about wealth accrued through sport? Is sport one area where people from poor backgrounds can become rich, and what does this mean for their approach to philanthropy?   Sportspeople as campaigners Are some sportspeople perceived as campaigners simply by virtue of who they are? When have sportspeople campaigned for change within their sport and when have they taken on wider social issues? After many notable examples of campaigning by sportspeople in the 1960s and 70s, why did we see a decline in the 1980s and 1990s? Are we seeing a resurgence in campaigning by sportspeople, with figures like Colin Kapaernick, Megan Rapinoe and Marcus Rashford coming to the fore? How do sports fans perceive campaigning by sportspeople?   Sports and Fundraising The long history of sporting charity fundraising events and the role of charity matches in the evolution of professional football Sportspeople fundraising: from the traditional of testimonial matches to raise money for players’ retirements to sportspeople taking on charity fundraising challenges in other sports Has the pandemic hit sports fundraising particularly hard, and what does this mean for charities that rely on running events etc?   Sports clubs and civil society What is the history of the relationship between sports clubs and voluntary associations? How did the development of sporting associations helped to foster civic engagement skills and ideals of mutual aid? What is the role of modern sports clubs as corporate donors? Is owning sports club a form of philanthropy…? What role do clubs play in acting as community anchors and giving people a sense of shared identity? How can this inform social action?       Related Links   CAF Giving Thought blog on Marcus Rashford, Dolly Parton & Public Perceptions of Philanthropy CAF Giving Thought blog on mutual aid post-Covid CAF Giving Thought podcast on mutual aid, charity & philanthropy CAF Giving Thought podcast with Jon Dean 2013 NY Times article about Lance Armstrong’s philanthropy HistPhil article “Giving Athletes: Why Sports Philanthropy Deserves Our Attention” Forbes, “The New Wave of Female Soccer Players as Philanthropists” BBC article, “Why Wealthy Sport Stars Get Passionate About Charity” The Common Goal Initiative The PFA page on player foundations Kay & Vamplew, “Beyond altruism: British football and charity, 1877–1914” Vamplew, “’It is pleasing to know that football can be devoted to charitable purposes': British football and charity 1870–1918”

In this episode we explore mutual aid: what is it, why is there so much interest in it right now and how does it relate to charity and philanthropy? Including: Defining the distinction between mutual aid and charity William Beveridge’s thoughts on mutual aid Peter Kropotkin and mutual aid as a fundamental element of human nature How does mutual aid relate to notions of solidarity and class identity? Why has mutual aid historically been so important for marginalised groups such as immigrant communities? Medieval mutual aid: the guilds Why did mutual aid become so prominent in the 19th century? What were the Friendly Societies, why were they important and why are they no longer around? How does mutual aid fit in with the post-WWII development of the voluntary sector? Why has mutual aid become so prominent as an idea during the pandemic? Is this a reflection of the unique circumstances of the pandemic or will it herald any longer-term changes in civil society? Does the enthusiasm for mutual aid networks demonstrate an unmet appetite for greater participation in addressing social causes? Is there a dark side to mutual aid? Can solidarity become exclusionary? Will the growth of mutual aid come at the cost of more traditional charitable giving and volunteering? Do mutual aid networks build social capital? If so, is it merely “bonding” social capital or also “bridging”? What is the role of technology in making mutual aid networks possible? What can we learn from other cultures of giving around the world in which mutual aid is much more prominent?     Related Links CAF Giving Thought blog, “Charity, Philanthropy & Mutual Aid” CAF Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy & Civil Society post-Covid: Key questions for the future” Excerpt from unpublished Giving Thought discussion paper on the science of giving: "Altruism, Evolution and Economics" CAF research on giving in East Africa NLGN report Communities vs. Coronavirus: The Rise of Mutual Aid Guardian long read, “The way we get through this is together': the rise of mutual aid under coronavirus” New Yorker, “What Mutual Aid Can Do During a Pandemic” Bloomberg, "A Visual History of Mutual Aid" Peter Kropotkin’s “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution”

In this episode we take a look at the philanthropic giving of MacKenzie Scott (former wife of Jeff Bezos), who has garnered a great deal of attention and praise for the scale, pace and approach of her philanthropy. We ask: what are the key aspects of received wisdom about giving that she is rejecting? And will this lead to wider changes in how big money philanthropy works in future? Including: -Rejecting the myth of the "self-made billionaire", in favour of recognition that luck, privilege & reliance on wider society are always factors in wealth creation. -Rejecting the Carnegian idea that "it's harder to give money away intelligently than earn it", and that if you're willing to cede power & give unrestricted grants it's actually eminently possible. -Rejecting the idea that philanthropy needs to be done slowly, or that it should aim towards perpetuity. -Rejecting the idea that grants need to be restricted or short-term. -Rejecting the idea that the donor has all the answers or should set the agenda -Rejecting the idea that being "strategic" means being top-down or technocratic. -Rejecting the idea that we need to maintain distance between donor and grantee, or avoid human connection in philanthropy. -Rejecting the idea that philanthropy by itself can ever be a solution to inequality. -Rejecting the idea that philanthropy needs to be secretive or opaque.   Related Links: MacKenzie Scott's July 2020 and December 2020 Medium posts Vox article on MacKenzie Scott's philanthropy Marker piece on MacKenzie Scott's background story Giving Thought podcast with Paul Vallely Giving Thought podcast on Jeff Bezos, Big Philanthropy and Climate Change Giving Thought podcast on philanthropy and structure Giving Thought podcast on philanthropy and rationality Giving Thought podcast on philanthropic pledges  

In this episode we unpick the complex relationship between philanthropy and democracy. Does philanthropy undermine democracy, or strengthen it? Do we need to make philanthropy itself more democratic? And if so, how? Including: Does philanthropy automatically introduce a “plutocratic bias” into public discourse and policy? Is lack of transparency a particular issue? Does the trend towards using structures like LLCs exacerbate this problem? Does the ability of individuals at any level of wealth to associate within civil society lead to the dangers of “faction” - with minority groups able to exert an undue negative influence on the democratic system? How does this relate to digitally-enabled conspiracy groups like QAnon? Does perpetuity in philanthropy result in intergenerational injustice as a result of the “dead hand of the donor”? What role does philanthropy play in giving voice and power to marginalised groups and thus overcoming “the tyranny of the majority” in a democracy? How does civil society campaigning and advocacy strengthen democracy? What role can philanthropy play in the countering disinformation and online extremism that has tarnished the public sphere? Can philanthropic support for public interest journalism bolster democracy? Can big money philanthropy be justified on the grounds of its ability to drive innovation & “discovery”? What role does philanthropy play in enabling a “battle of Ideas”, and is this to the benefit or detriment of democracy? Is voluntary action a “nursery school of democracy”, as many have argued? Do we need to democratise philanthropy itself? Does this need to be with respect to donors or recipients, or both? What models are there for doing so?   Related Links: Giving Thought blog “Does Philanthropy Help or Hinder Democracy?” Giving Thought discussion paper, “From the Margins to the Mainstream: Philanthropy & Social Movements Furthering Diversity, Equity & Inclusion in Society” Rhod’s Cass Business School Master’s course lecture on “Principles of Philanthropy Policymaking” Stanford Social Innovation Review, “How Can Philanthropy Help Rehabilitate US Democracy?” Rob Reich’s book “Just Giving: Why Philanthropy is Failing Democracy and How it Can Do Better” Sir Arthur Hobhouse’s book “The Dead Hand” Giving Thought podcast interviews with Rob Reich, Lucy Bernholz, Sameer Padania, Paul Vallely and Rose Longhurst. Giving Thought deep-dives on philanthropy and structure; philanthropy, risk and innovation; philanthropy diversity & inclusion; Effective Altruism; philanthropy and the welfare state

In this episode, at the end of a tumultuous and unpredictable year, we attempt (wisely or not!) to give some predictions for what 2021 might bring...   ECONOMIC DOWNTURN Impact of Pandemic & Brexit: more demand, charity finances hit, less giving? Charity closures/mergers? Reimagining resilience?   Political Division Ongoing division Ongoing politicisation of charity/culture wars Closing space for civil society Foreign funding restrictions   Nationalism/Globalism/Localism Will the pandemic make us think for locally, nationally or globally? Will we see more moves towards devolution? Philanthrolocalism   The Post-Pandemic workplace How will changes made through necessity during the pandemic affecting the charity workplace longer term? Will we see more orgs thinking through the optimum balance offline and online for their work as we become more aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both (e.g. efficiency and ability to reach wider geographic area vs value of offline serendipity, human connection) Will there continue to be more adoption of remote/mixed working? Will we see orgs change how they think about the purpose of the office? Will this begin a geographic rebalancing of the charity sector workforce? The Expanding landscape for doing good Further expansion of space for “doing good” as we see more networked movements, informal P2P giving, mutual aid groups, corporates with purpose etc. What is the USP of charities in this context? Rebalancing of corporate/charity relationships as companies lay claim to purpose? Continuing rise of networked movements Continuing interest in Mutual Aid? The participation premium- what can charities learn?   Cross cutting issues Will the focus on racial justice/equality decline across wider society as we move further away from this year’s momentum around BLM? Can civil society take a lead in maintaining that momentum? Will we see the focus on climate renewed? Will these issues increasingly be seen not as “cause areas”, but as cross-cutting concerns that all CSOs need to take into account? What does this mean in practice- e.g. re investment approaches, leadership in civil society, composition of the non-profit workforce etc?   Post-pandemic Philanthropic funding trends Unrestricted/core cost/trust based grantmaking. Will the trend continue? More collaboration Push for centralisation Continuing pushback on impact measurement More participatory approaches New areas of funding focus: social movements infrastructure digital foresight Journalism    Philanthropy Under Fire Ongoing critiques: Tainted donations (expect more examples) Anti-democratic nature of big philanthropy Philanthropy part of the problem re inequality  New critiques: Pace, perpetuity (e.g. US DAF legislation) Philanthropy & conspiracy theories   Mass Giving What is happening to giving? Long term decline or not? Giving pulled forward in response to the pandemic, or increased overall? Will we see more big philanthropy focussed on encouraging mass giving?   Disintermediation & Platform Philanthropy Acceleration of existing growth of online giving due to pandemic will put more emphasis on platforms, leading to: more focus on responsibilities of those platforms (Neutrality of platforms/advisers under greater scrutiny Further moving away from donors giving to orgs towards P2P giving/crowdfunding  Use of payment apps (Venmo/CashApp) to give direct to individuals More commercial platforms offering giving functionality   Awareness of Platform dependency Risks CSOs will become more aware that platforms are not digital public space Examples of platform dependency risks: Terms of Service changes Censorship   Engagement of civil society in tech issues Will the enforced pivot to digital during the pandemic lead to wider awareness of, and engagement in, technology issues? Growing interest in civil society alternatives to commercial digital infrastructure? Continuing pushback on tech ethics framing?   AI trends Further development of giving via conversational AI interfaces (and growing awareness of opportunities & challenges)? More examples of use of AI for process automation, e.g. in grantmaking?   Immersive Tech More supporter led fundraising using short-form video content (TikTok-style)? VAR becomes more popular; more examples of it being used for fundraising? Further forays into gaming and E-sports for fundraising?   Cryptocurrency & blockchain Renewal of interest in crypto-philanthropy? More examples of practical/ ethical challenges (e.g. anonymous donations from problematic sources, volatility of crypto-assets).   Cybersecurity & RegTech challenges Ransomware/cyber attacks on charities increase (linked to increase in remote working?)       Related Links: Rhod’s Alliance magazine piece on “The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy” Rhod’s guest appearance on Zoe Amar and Paul Thomas’s Starts At The Top podcast CAF report on global responses to supporting philanthropy and civil society during the pandemic “The Giving Apps: How Venmo and CashApp Upended a Centuries-Old Model” OneZero Medium “Charity, Philanthropy & Mutual Aid Post-Pandemic”, Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy and Civil Society After Covid-19” Giving Thought blog Our Giving Thought podcast with Louise Pulford, Josiane Smith and Dame Julia Unwin Our Giving Thought podcast with Paul Vallely Our Giving Thought podcast with Ingrid Srinath Our Giving Thought podcast with Lucy Bernholz Lucy Bernholz's 2021 Blueprint philanthropy & civil society industry forecast for Stanford PACS Our Giving Thought podcast with Regan Ralph Our Giving Thought podcast on The History of Philanthropy & Civil Society in Times of Crisis Our Giving Thought podcast on Tainted Donations “Statues, Slavery & Tainted Donations”, CAF Giving Thought blog “How Nonprofits Can Utilize Decentralized Finance”, session at the BitGive Foundation’s DePhi conference CAF submission to DCMS inquiry into Immersive & Addictive Technology CAF Giving Thought paper “Machine Made Goods: Charities, Philanthropy & Artificial Intelligence” CAF Giving Thought work on blockchain and cryptocurrency CAF Giving Thought paper “Networking Opportunities: Rediscovering Decentralisation in Philanthropy & Civil Society”  

In this episode we talk to Iqbal Nasim, CEO of the National Zakat Foundation, about Islamic giving and using technology to transform the way Zakat works. Including: What is Zakat and how does it fit within Islamic teaching? What does Islamic teaching say about how Zakat is to be given? (i.e. are there specific causes, should it be anonymous etc?) Is Zakat the primary focus of giving for most Muslims, or do many give in other ways too? What is Sadaqa, and how does it relate to Zakat? Does most Zakat from Muslims in the UK go to international causes? Why, then, did NZF decide to focus on distributing Zakat in the UK? How much Zakat goes to individuals and how much to organisations (charities, NGOs etc?) How does this reflect Islamic teaching? How is Zakat viewed by givers and recipients- is it seen as a gift made through charity or a payment made as a requirement of justice? Is there any stigma to being a recipient of Zakat? What responsibilities are there as a digital platform towards those giving and receiving zakat? Should you aim to be a neutral intermediary, or do you have to take a more active role in informing donors, assessing recipients etc? Disintermediation through technology brings benefits in terms of allowing more direct connection between giver and receiver, but it may also bring challenges- e.g. in individual crowdfunding there are growing concerns we are seeing biases and old-fashioned distinctions between the “deserving” and “undeserving” poor emerge. Are there similar challenges when it comes to zakat? How can they be mitigated? Does the focus on giving to individuals make it harder to address issues at a more systemic level? (i.e. because you can’t fund campaigning or advocacy for larger-scale change) There is a lot of interest in the wider world of philanthropy (particularly in an international development context) in tapping into Zakat as a potential new source of funding for existing causes, or aligning it with the SDGs etc. Is this feasible, or does it misunderstand what Zakat is and the motivations behind it?   Related Links: The National Zakat Foundation Islamic Relief UK’s guide to giving in Islam Rhod’s Alliance magazine blog on “The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy”

In this episode we talk to Asha Curran, CEO of Giving Tuesday - ahead of this year’s event on Tuesday 2nd December -about distributed leadership, movement building and the importance of mass giving. Including: Decentralisation & Social Movements What is the key appeal of networked movements? Do people believe they are more effective (particularly when it comes to huge global challenges that might require radical solutions, like the climate crisis and racial inequality/injustice) or is it more about their ability to democratize participation and offer more active modes of engagement? How can traditional nonprofits embrace some of the benefits of networked or decentralized approaches? Does this require a major change of structure, or just mindset? Distributed leadership, new power and leaderlessness GT is a combination of elements with formal structure and many informal elements - how do these different parts of the movement interact? How much centralised input is there in shaping/setting parameters for the formal elements? Are there necessary limits on the freedom of informal elements? (E.g. parameters/red lines on what can be associated with GT brand, even informally) How are these set and policed? How do you manage power dynamics within a decentralised movement to prevent the emergence of hidden cliques/elites, and to ensure that everyone’s voice can be heard equally? Mass giving Can mass giving movements like GT help to counter concerns about the potentially anti-democratic impact of big money philanthropy? As GT has developed into a global movement, how has this informed your understanding of what we should think of as “giving”? Can GT help us to develop a better global perspective & understand differences and similarities between cultures of giving around the world? Do different countries around the world place more emphasis on non-financial giving in their approaches to GT? Has this had an impact on thinking in the US? What is the idea behind the Starling Collective? How does this fit with the wider work of Giving Tuesday? Platforms, philanthropy & civil society Is there an important role for movements like GT in ensuring that as more giving shifts to the online world, we have platforms and infrastructure that is driven by civil society values rather than ceding control of online giving to commercial platforms (who may wish to offer giving functionality as an add-on for users)? What responsibilities do giving platforms have towards those giving and receiving through them? Are they ever neutral intermediaries, or do they need to accept a more active role in informing donors, assessing recipients etc? Data What is the Giving Tuesday Data Collaborative? How did it come about? What have you learned about giving trends in the US (and elsewhere) so far through the GTDC? Can we use data to drive more giving/better giving? If so, how?   Related Links: Giving Tuesday The Giving Tuesday Data Commons Giving Tuesday UK The Starling Collective Asha’s interview with Stanford’s Digital Impact blog and podcast Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Lucy Bernholz on digital civil society Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Regan Ralph on funding social movements Our Giving Thought podcast on philanthropy and structure Rhod’s paper “Networking Opportunities: Rediscovering Decentralisation in Philanthropy & Civil Society?”

In this episode we talk to Paul Vallely, author of Philanthropy: From Aristotle to Zuckerberg about his new book and what we can learn from history that can help inform our understanding of modern philanthropy and our thinking about where it should go in the future. Including: What value does a historical perspective bring? Would people working in philanthropy/civil society would benefit from more historical perspective? What is the fundamental distinction between the Greco-Roman tradition of philanthropy and that which emerged from the Abrahamic religions, and why it is still important in understanding philanthropy today? What does history tell us about the relationship between charity and justice: i.e. do they exist in opposition, or is charity a means of delivering justice? How is this debate is reflected in the history of philanthropy, and why does it remain relevant today? How have views on the nature of poverty shaped philanthropy? I.e. Is poverty seen as a moral failing on the part of the individual, or a structural flaw in society? Are poverty & inequality “problems to be solved” or merely part of the natural order that accords some wealth and some poverty- and what does this mean for the role of charity? As we see controversy once again about “Victorian attitudes” towards the “deserving and undeserving poor”, are these issues that we need to grapple with in thinking about philanthropy? What can we learn from history about the question of “tainted donations”, and the extent to which the way in which wealth has been created determines the legitimacy of trying to do good through giving it away? What is the distinction the book draws between “strategic” & “reciprocal” philanthropy? It is clearly almost impossible to understand the history of philanthropy without understanding some theology, as religion and charity were inextricably entwined for a long time. But what role does religion play in driving and shaping modern philanthropy? The freedom that philanthropy and civil society have to run counter to the status quo or the policies and public opinion of a particular time has been a key part of driving historic social change. How do we preserve this freedom, whilst also answering concerns that unchecked philanthropic power could end up being anti-democratic? What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision? The book speaks approvingly of celebrity activists (making the point that they are in some ways following the template set by the original “philanthropist” John Howard). What role can this kind of philanthropy play? Why is it often viewed somewhat cynically?     Related Links   Philanthropy: From Aristotle to Zuckerberg website Guardian extract from Paul’s book, “How Philanthropy Benefits the Super-Rich” Paul’s blog for NPC “Why history should matter to philanthropists and philanthropy professionals” Paul on BBC Radio Three’s Free Thinking. Paul’s Jewish Chronicle piece, “Tzedakah: a concept that changed the world” Rhod’s book, Public Good by Private Means (and free PDF version) Our CAF Giving Thought podcast with Beth Breeze Our CAF Giving Thought podcast with Ben Soskis Our CAF Giving Thought podcast with Andrew Rudd Rhod’s World Economic Forum article, “Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go”

In this bonus DVD extra mini-episode, Louise Pulford - CEO of the Social Innovation Exchange (SIX) - turns the table on our host, Rhod Davies, and asks him for his thoughts on key trends affecting philanthropy now and post-pandemic.

In this episode, we talk to Louise Pulford, Josiane Smith and Dame Julia Unwin about the findings from a new global horizon scan by the Social Innovation Exchange (SIX), looking at the challenges and opportunities facing philanthropy post-Covid. In a wide-ranging conversation we discussed: How many trends in philanthropic funding we are seeing during the pandemic will lead to longer-term changes? How can we be more intentional about pursuing those we want to see? How has the pandemic accelerated or altered existing debates about philanthropy? What can we learn from historical examples of how philanthropy has responded to crises? Or from places in the world where crisis response is part of the normal role for philanthropy? To what extent is it true that “what we did before a crisis is who we are in a crisis”? i.e. is the response of different funders a reflection of their existing ethos and practice, or have some genuinely changed what they do? How do funders balance the immediate short-term demands of a crisis with their role in supporting issues over the longer-term? Has the pandemic affected relationships between philanthropic funders and government around the world? If so, for better or worse? We are seeing the emergence of new organisational models within civil society, including many that look less like traditional hierarchies and more like networks. What opportunities and challenges might this bring? We are also seeing new approaches such as participatory grantmaking, which seek to shift power as well as money towards recipients, gain traction? Will this be a big trend in coming years? Do charities and funders need to be more transparent? If so, why and about what? Who does it benefit? What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision? What should we make of criticisms that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution? Do some donors and funders recognise the challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change? Should cross-cutting issues such as the climate crisis or racial justice not be seen as “causes”, but as factors that all funders need to take into account in their work? How can we ensure funders and CSOs are in a better position to address future crises?     Related Links Julia’s SIX provocation piece “Living in turbulent times and re-centring the conversation” “Philanthropy, Power and New Challenges”, Insights from a global call between SIX and WINGS “What is the power of networks in philanthropy? Reflections from SIX” SIX Funders Node Rhod’s article for World Economic Forum, “Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go”, Our CAF Giving Thought podcast series on “Covid-19: Voices from Civil Society” CAF Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future” Our previous CAF Giving Thought podcast with Julia Unwin The CAF Giving Thought microsite

In this episode we talk to Ingrid Srinath, Director of the Centre for Social Impact & Philanthropy at Ashoka University about philanthropy and civil society in India and the impact of new restrictions have come in as part of the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act 2020 (FCRA 2020). (Disclaimer: the views expressed are Ingrid’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of her employer, or of CAF). We discussed: The FCRA 2020 What is the FCRA 2020? Why are CSOs in India concerned about the impact it will have? How much existing funding will be affected by the new rules? What is the rationale from government? Does this stand up to scrutiny? Has the Covid-19 pandemic played any role in precipitating this move on the part of the Indian government? What is the rationale for prohibiting onward granting? Why is this a particular cause for concern? Will this particularly harm smaller organisations and less poplar causes? As part of the new FCRA the Indian government has stipulated that no more than 20% of a foreign contribution can be spent on “administrative expenses”. How are these defined? What is the rationale for this? Will this new limitation on administrative expenses make it harder to invest in infrastructure, digital capabilities, governance etc.? The new law also requires CSOs in receipt of FCRA funds to do so in a dedicated bank account at a New Delhi branch of the State Bank of India- what is the rationale for this?   The wider context for Civil Society & Philanthropy in India What is the overall makeup of the Indian civil society sector, in terms of formalised vs informal orgs, large vs small, different cause areas etc.? What is the attitude of the Indian government towards civil society in general? What is the attitude towards CSO advocacy and campaigning? How has the Covid pandemic affected Indian civil society? What is the infrastructure for civil society in India like? Are there gaps, and if so where? What is the history and current context for philanthropy in India? E.g. how much HNWI giving is there? How much mass market giving? What role does corporate philanthropy play? What role do foundations play? What kind of domestic causes receive philanthropic funding in India? What is the attitude of the Indian government towards philanthropy? What is the attitude of the Indian public towards philanthropy? What kind of philanthropic responses to the covid-19 crisis have we seen in India? Do recent critiques of philanthropy in the US and elsewhere resonate in the Indian context? (E.g. re that philanthropy exacerbates inequality, that it is anti-democratic, that some source of wealth are “tainted” etc.).   Related links: Ingrid’s blog on “How the Proposed FCRA Amendments Hurt India’s Development and Democracy” Times of India interview with Ingrid, “FCRA Law could dry up money for less popular causes, shut smaller NGOs down” Ingrid’s article with Smarinita Shetty for Alliance Magazine, “Bleak prognosis for Indian civil society following new foreign funding bill” Ingrid on Twitter CAF India briefing on FCRA 2020 CAF America’s recent webinar on “India’s Amended Foreign Contribution Regulations: What You Need to Know” CAF’s 2019 India Giving report CAF’s 2017 paper Do As I Say, Not As I Do: UK Policy & The Global Closing Space for Civil Society The Council on Foundations (US) latest guidance on FCRA and funding in India for US organisations  

In this episode we talk to Lucy Bernholz, Director of the Digital Civil Society Lab at Stanford University’s Center on Philanthropy & Civil Society (Stanford PACS) about how technology is reshaping civil society and the challenges and opportunities this will bring. Including:   Digital civil society Is there any meaningful distinction between “civil society” and “digital civil society” now? Has the current period of enforced digitisation as a consequence of the COVID pandemic led to more CSOs engaging with tech and tech issues? What dangers are there for CSOs in assuming that platforms are objective or neutral public spaces? Are these problems likely to be exacerbated by the enforced pivot to digital for so many orgs as a result of COVID? Are funders (e.g. foundations) getting to grips with the challenges and opportunities of the fourth industrial revolution? Influencing the wider development & implementation of tech Can nonprofits play a meaningful role in ensuring that tech is designed and implemented ethically? Does the focus on “ethical” approaches to tech risk diverting attention from the need for more traditional mechanisms of legislation and regulation? Are the inherent power imbalances between CSOs and tech companies too great for the latter to influence the former, or can asymmetric methods be used to overcome them? What role can foundations and funders play in helping nonprofits engage with technological change? Trust & Accountability DO CSOs face new challenges to their authenticity in a digital world (deepfakes, astroturfing etc)? Will perverse incentives within the online attention economy present a particular challenge for CSOs when it comes to maintaining trust? Do we need to make philanthropy more democratic, or accountable to the people and communities it is supposed to serve? If so, how? Social movements & new forms of organising If digital tools enable people to form groups easily and organise in different ways, does this make traditional nonprofits less relevant as people look to networked models of social change? What is the major appeal of networked movements? Do people believe they are more effective, or is it more about their ability to democratize participation and offer more active modes of engagement? How can traditional nonprofits embrace some of the benefits of networked or decentralized approaches? Does this require a major change of structure, or just mindset? Do the affordances of technology genuinely overcome the known weaknesses of structureless, leaderless or non-hierarchical organisational models, or will we simply end up rediscovering some of these weaknesses in the digital context? Data & Automation Could CSOs take a lead on modelling ethical approaches to the collection, storage and usage of data? Or is this too far out of their hands? Is AI is a big deal for nonprofits? If so, why? As the internet shifts from being something we access via specific interfaces to a universal digital substrate all around us (via the growth of IoT, edge computing etc), what new opportunities and challenges might this create for CSOs? Predictions and Foresight in civil society: What role can historical insight play in shaping our thinking about the future of civil society? How can we get more foresight and futures thinking embedded in civil society? What role could foundations and funders play? Should CSOs be seen as a valuable source of potential knowledge and insight to guide wider attempts by governments and others to identify future trends and scenarios?   Related Content: Stanford Digital Civil Society Lab The Digital Impact blog Stanford PACS Lucy’s own blog, “Philanthropy 2173” Lucy’s recent 5-part Chronicle of Philanthropy series on “Reimagining Philanthropy” Blueprint (Lucy’s series of annual predictions for civil society) Rhodri’s Alliance piece on “The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy” CAF Giving Thought’s work on “the future of doing good” CAF Giving Thought discussion paper “Networking Opportunities? Rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy & civil society” Rhodri’s piece for Digital Impact, “When Nobody Knows You’re a Dog: Tech, Civil Society, and the Fight for Authenticity”

In this episode we talk to Regan Ralph, President and CEO of the Fund for Global Human Rights, about her experience of funding right-based movements around the world and what she has learned about the challenges and opportunities of funding social movements through philanthropy. Including: What does philanthropic funding for social movements look like? i.e. what are the various elements of an overall movement that can be funded- e.g. grassroots organising/movement building, policy work, advocacy, legal challenges etc? How can a funder determine where best to allocate their resources in order to support a movement most effectively? Are traditional nonprofits and funders too often a reflection of existing systems and power structures to push for the kind of radical solutions we need to deal with huge global challenges like the climate crisis and racial inequality/injustice? Is that why more people seem to be looking towards social movements? Can we find forms of philanthropy that are genuinely able to support fundamental reform to the very systems in which wealth has been created? What are some of the hallmarks of this type of philanthropy? How big a risk is there that foundations and other funders co-opt social movements by deliberately introducing grant stipulations etc aimed to direct the focus of the movement away from controversial areas or soften their tactics? Is there also a danger that even well-intentioned funders inadvertently skew the direction of movements by virtue of the choices they make about what to fund and what not to fund? How can we avoid this risk? Does a desire for “measurable impact” from funders limit their willingness to fund social change movements, because the success of their work may not be easy to attribute or quantify? Can funding from donors/foundations confer legitimacy on movements as well as financial resources? Is this useful for the movements? Can funders play an important role by taking a “helicopter view” and helping to share knowledge and insight between social movements that might otherwise never come into contact? How do they ensure they do this within becoming directive? Why is core-cost and multi-year funding so important when supporting movements? Are we seeing more funders recognise this and adapt the way they fund? There is a lot of focus in global philanthropy and civil society at the moment on “shifting power”- from funders to recipients, from the global north to the global south etc. Why is this so important, and how do you ensure through your work that power is transferred at the same time as financial resources? Are there limits to empowering the grassroots? I.e. are there situations in which it is better for expert funders and organisations to set aims and design programs to deliver outcomes that are in the best interests of communities? Or is it always better to empower people to seek their own solutions, even when those solutions might be less “effective”? We are seeing particular focus right now on the idea of “leaderless” movements, with decentralised or non-hierarchical structures (e.g. XR, #MeToo etc). Are there particular challenges for traditional funders in engaging with such movements?   Related Links:   The Fund for Global Human Rights Regan’s Alliance article “Dismantling inequality must be part of the pandemic response” Regan’s piece for Thomson Reuters Foundation News, “Community activists and action are key to the COVID-19 response” Giving Thought podcast on “Philanthropy, Civil Rights & Movement Capture” with Megan Ming Francis Giving Thought podcast on Social Change philanthropy with Julie Broome from Ariadne Network Giving Thought podcast on “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion” Rhodri’s Alliance article “The history of philanthropy & social movements for diversity, equity and inclusion” CAF Giving Thought discussion paper, ‘From the Margins to the Mainstream: Philanthropy and social movements for diversity, equity & inclusion in society” Rhodri’s paper, “Networking Opportunities: rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy?”

In this episode we chat to Rob Cope, Director of Remember A Charity, about charitable legacy gifts and legacy fundraising: what they are, what role they play in the overall charity landscape and how they have changed during the COVID pandemic. Including How big a part of the landscape for charitable giving in the UK are legacies? How has this changed over time? If legacies have been a growth area in recent years (as many figures suggest), why is this? Is there greater awareness, more fundraising, or are people simply more likely to leave wills? What particular role do legacies play in the overall funding mix for charities? (i.e. what is their unique value?) Why do people leave legacies? How to fundraisers tap into some of the complex psychological drivers? How do legacy gifts relate to other forms of giving at an individual level? (i.e. do most legacy gifts come from people who already give in other ways, or do they come instead of other gifts?) Does discomfort when it comes to talking about death present an ongoing barrier to legacy fundraising? Does uncertainty about the legal status of legacy gifts (and a number of high-profile cases of legal challenge) present a risk? How has the COVID crisis affect the charitable legacy market? Has increases awareness of mortality resulted in more will-making (and consequently more legacy gifts?) Have there been issues with existing legacy gifts during the crisis? (Either in terms of sustaining them, or finalising them in some cases). What effect has the impact of the pandemic on normal end-of-life processes such as funerals had on legacy giving? (E.g. has it resulted in more in-memory gifts from those who have been unable to commemorate the loss of loved ones properly?) How has new legacy fundraising been affected by lockdown measures and restrictions on physical interaction? Have fundraisers had to be more sensitive to the challenges of discussing legacy gifts at a time when many older people have felt particularly nervous or afraid as a result of the pandemic? What impact might the short and medium term economic downturn caused by the pandemic have on the legacy market?   Related Links:   Remember A Charity’s website Remember A Charity on Twitter Civil Society article: The Wombles to feature in this year’s Remember A Charity Week campaign Our CAF Giving Thought podcast episode “Philanthropy, Death & Taxes Part 1” CAF Giving Thought blog, “Millions Now Giving Will Never Die: Life Extension, Whole-Brain Emulation and Philanthropy”

 In this episode - the fourth in our mini-series on “European philanthropy during and after COVID” – we speak to Carola Carazzone, Secretary General of Assifero, about philanthropy in Italy and beyond. Including What is the history and current context for philanthropy in Italy? How does this differ from the cultures, histories and legal/policy environments for philanthropy in other places across Europe? Are there commonalties? I.e. is it meaningful to talk about “European philanthropy”? What is the balance between local, regional, national and international approaches in Italian philanthropic funding? What is the attitude of the Italian government towards philanthropy? What kind of philanthropic responses to the covid-19 crisis have we seen in Italy? What challenges have they faced? What is the role of infrastructure bodies in helping civil society organisations and funders navigate and adapt to a rapidly-changing environment? Has the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to coordinate responses effectively increased awareness of the value of infrastructure? What elements of infrastructure are required for a healthy culture of philanthropy and a vibrant civil society? Do we need to make a renewed case for the value of infrastructure and the need to ensure it is properly funded?   Related Links: Assifero The data mapping of the philanthropic response to COVID-19 I Italy (“Le risposte della Filantropia al COVID-19” Carola’s 2020 Alliance article “Flexibility and freedom of foundation funding can boost third sector during Coronavirus crisis” Carola’s 2018 Alliance article “Debunking two myths to avoid agony in Italian civil society” Carola’s 2020 piece for WINGS “Questions are the answer”. This is our time to shape the world we want- everyone can be a change maker.’ Our recent CAF paper on European policy responses to COVID-19

In this episode - the third in our mini-series on “European philanthropy during and after COVID” – we talk to Julie Broome, Director of the Ariadne network about philanthropic funding for social change and rights issues now and in the future. Including: What is social change funding? What are its particular features? Is it limited to a niche subset of funders, or something that all can do to some extent? What is the history and current landscape for social change and rights-focussed philanthropy across Europe? How do the cultures, histories and legal/policy environments for philanthropy vary across Europe? How does this affect the work of social change funders? What kind of responses have we seen from social change funders across Europe to the challenges posed by covid-19? Has Covid-19 (and government responses to it) exacerbated existing rights issues? Will we see new rights issues emerge as the political imperatives of the pandemic lead to governments either accidentally or deliberating introducing new measures (e.g. on data collection and usage) that could further close the space for civil society in the future? What is the role of infrastructure and support organisations in helping civil society organisations and funders navigate and adapt to a rapidly-changing environment? Has the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to coordinate responses effectively increased awareness of the value of infrastructure? What elements of infrastructure are required for a healthy culture of philanthropy and a vibrant civil society? Do we need to make a renewed case for the value of infrastructure and the need to ensure it is properly funded? Major challenges like the climate crisis, global inequality or the impact of technological development raise difficult questions about whether a pragmatic approach of working with existing systems can ever be enough; or whether we need to embrace more radical, transformative change efforts. How do social change and rights funders approach this thorny problem? We are seeing particular focus right now on the idea of social change movements, many of which have decentralised or non-hierarchical governance models (e.g. XR, #MeToo etc). Are there challenges for traditional funders in engaging with such movements? How can social change funders with experience in this area help others to navigate the challenges? Why is core-cost funding so important when supporting social change movements?   Related Links: Ariadne Ariadne 2020 Forecast Rhod’s Alliance article on “The history of philanthropy & social movements for diversity, equity and inclusion” Our Giving Thought discussion paper From the Margins to the Mainstream: Philanthropy and social movements for diversity, equity & inclusion in society Our recent CAF paper on European policy responses to COVID-19

In this episode - the second in our mini-series on “European philanthropy during and after COVID” – we talk to James Magowan from The European Community Foundation Initiative about the unique role of Community Foundations (CF) in the pandemic response and beyond. Including What is ECFI and what does it do? What is the history and current landscape for CFs across Europe? How do the cultures, histories and legal/policy environments for philanthropy vary across Europe? How does this affect the make-up of CFs in different places? Does this present any challenges in terms of positioning CFs as a coherent “movement”? Are there commonalties? I.e. is it meaningful to talk about “European philanthropy”? What kind of philanthropic responses have we seen across Europe to the challenges posed by covid-19? What role have CFs played? Has the focus on CFs during the pandemic been too transactional (i.e. focused on their role as distributors of funding), and does this risk undermining their other roles as community anchors and advocates? What is the role of infrastructure bodies in helping civil society organisations and funders navigate and adapt to a rapidly-changing environment? What elements of infrastructure are required for a healthy culture of philanthropy and a vibrant civil society? Should CFs be considered as “infrastructure”? Has the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to coordinate responses effectively increased awareness of the value of infrastructure? Do we need to make a renewed case for the value of infrastructure and the need to ensure it is properly funded?   Related Links: The European Community Foundation Initiative (ECFI) UK Community Foundations (UKCF) The Association of Charitable Foundations (ACF) CAF Giving Thought podcast with Fozia Irfan, CEO of Community Foundation for Bedfordshire & Luton CAF Giving Thought podcast with Rob Williamson, Community Foundation for Tyne & Wear and Northumberland Our recent CAF paper on European policy responses to COVID-19 Rhod’s blog, “Awkward Places: Austerity, democracy and the challenges of civic philanthropy”

This episode kicks off a mini-series on European philanthropy during and after COVID-19 pandemic, exploring how philanthropic funders have responded to the crisis and how it might affect philanthropy longer term. Our first conversation is with Max von Abendroth, Director of DAFNE, and Rosa Gallego, Director of International Relations at the Spanish Association of Foundations. In a wide-ranging chat we covered many fascinating topics including:   The rich and varied history of philanthropy across Europe and how this has shaped the cultures of philanthropy and the legal and regulatory environments we see today. Are there more similarities or differences between philanthropy in different parts of Europe? To what extent does it make sense to talk about “European philanthropy”? How much philanthropy takes place at a local, national or international level in Europe? What has the philanthropic response across Europe to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic been like? What particular role have community foundations played? What are funders doing to address the stark inequalities that have been laid bare by the pandemic? Are funders and CSOs collaborating more as a result of the crisis? How can we build on this longer term? Will the short-term shift towards funding core costs result in longer-term changes? How can philanthropic funders make better use of data? Are new laws and restrictions imposed by governments to address the public health challenges of the pandemic resulting in a furthering shrinking of civic space in some countries? How concerned should we be? Has the crisis highlighted the importance of philanthropic infrastructure? What are the elements of a healthy ecosystem of philanthropy infrastructure? Should philanthropy support organisations merely reflect the views and interests of their members, or can they play a leadership role and provide constructive challenge? How do we ensure that infrastructure is sustainable over the longer term?   Related Links:   DAFNE Spanish Association of Foundations PEX ACF Stronger Foundations project WINGS paper on Perspectives on Arab and Global Philanthropy: Roles and Approaches WINGS paper on “What Makes a Strong Ecosystem of Support for Philanthropy?” McKinsey Report on “Reimagining European Philanthropy” Candid Giving Thought blog on Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future Our CAF Giving Thought podcast Philanthropy, civil society and covid-19: what now, what next? Our Giving Thought podcast series on “COVID-19: Voices from Civil Society”  

In this episode we talk to Matthew Bowcock and Cath Dovey, founders of the Beacon Collaborative, about developing the UK’s culture of philanthropy both pre- and post-Covid. Including What is the Beacon Collaborative? What was the UK culture of philanthropy like pre-Covid? How does this perhaps differ from the culture in other countries (e.g. the US?) What do we know about the barriers that prevent more wealthy people giving? What has the response from wealthy philanthropists to the Covid-19 crisis been like? How have attitudes to collaboration among philanthropists and funders changed as a result of the current context? How do we balance the emphasis on centralisation/coordination of philanthropy necessitated by the crisis with the choice and freedom that is likely to motivate donors over the longer term? Why are many donors moving from restricted to unrestricted funding right now? Is this going to herald a longer-term shift? Should we expect anything in philanthropy to change fundamentally as a result of what we are going through? If so, what? Are we likely to see a more positive or more negative narrative about philanthropy post-Covid?     Related Links   The Beacon Collaborative website The Beacon Collaborative Manifesto CAF's Coronavirus Hub Our CAF Giving Thought podcast interview series on Covid-19: Voices from Civil Society Our CAF Giving Thought podcast on Questioning the philanthropic response to Covid-19, with Kris Putnam-Walkerly Our CAF Giving Thought podcast Philanthropy, civil society and covid-19: what now, what next? Rhod’s blog on Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future    

In this episode we talk to Simon Burton, founder and CEO of the Charity Film Awards, about how charities can use film to portray and amplify their work. Including:   -What is the aim of the Charity Film Awards and how did it come about? -In what interesting ways have charity entrants to the competition been using video? -Why is storytelling important for charities? -Positive vs negative representations of charities and the people they serve: do upbeat messages work? Or are tragic images still the norm? -Is it possible for organisations with limited resources to use video effectively as a tool? -Will we see more charities engaging with video as a result of the enforced digital transformation brought about by Covid-19? -Have any charities used short-form video and platforms like TikTok effectively? -Are any charities using virtual and augmented reality or 360 video? -How did the CFA turn itself into a virtual event in such a short space of time? -Will we see virtual events becoming more the norm after the coronavirus situation is over? -Are charities well-represented in mainstream screen media? -Are there any good TV programmes, films about charities or philanthropy? If not, why not?     Related links:   The Charity Film Awards website- including links to this year’s winners and winners from previous years. Out previous CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Philanthropy at the Movies” Rhod’s Giving Thought blog, Lights, Camera, Altruism: Philanthropy in movies Rhod’s Third Sector article “Are Marvel's Avengers just modern-day philanthropists?”  

In episode 77 we talk to Jon Dean, Senior Lecturer in Politics & Sociology at Sheffield Hallam University, about his new book The Good Glow: Charity and the Symbolic Power of Doing Good. Including:   What role does the way in which our charitable actions are viewed by others play in shaping our giving? Is the “warm glow” of giving always dependent on one’s acts being visible to others, or can it be entirely personal? Does the symbolic power of giving diminish if others are aware of how this functions? (i.e. once we suspect that charity is motivated partly a desire for social status, does that reduce our willingness to play along?) To what extent has the halo effect of philanthropy been deliberately used by the wealthy to preclude or offset wider criticism (e.g. of their tax affairs, business practices etc.)? What happens if critiques of philanthropy undermine its symbolic value to the donor? (i.e. if people’s default mode is scepticism or cynicism, does this lessen the appeal to the donor of making public gifts?) Does the desire for anonymity among some donors run counter to the idea that a desire for social status is a crucial part of the motivation for giving? (Or is it merely important that the “right” people know you gave?) What happens when the social rewards/warm glow of giving become temporally dissociated from the actual transfer of money (as with the tendency to make “pledges” rather than outright gifts)? What about when this is taken to its extreme conclusion (as with Donald Trump’s appropriation of the trappings of philanthropy without actually giving any money)? How has social media changed things when it comes to using charity to present ourselves positively to others? Does a focus on the outcomes/impact of giving, rather than the act or intention, potentially lessen the importance of the social symbolism of charity (an extreme case being that of Effective Altruism)? Do charities rely too much on the authority that comes from their “symbolic power”? In a future where the options for doing good are likely to be far wider (e.g. crowdfunding, online movements, corporate purpose etc.) and charities are not the only game in town, will they have a rude awakening? How do the themes in the book relate to the current context of charity during the covid-19 pandemic? Have charities come to rely on the enormous symbolic power of the NHS? Have views on the responsibilities of the state vs charity shifted in ways that will affect the perception of charitable acts in future?     Related links: Jon’s new book The Good Glow Jon’s recent blog about the book for HistPhil Jon’s article “The limits of digital charity: Young people, giving and social media” David Fahrentold’s Pulitzer Prize citation for reporting that helped to “cast doubt on Donald Trump’s assertions of generosity toward charities.” Our Giving Thought podcast episode on “philanthropic pledges” Our Giving Thought podcast with Ben Soskis on “learning from the history of philanthropy”

In episode 76 we talk to global philanthropy expert Kris Putnam-Walkerly about her new book “Delusional Altruism”, and about how philanthropists and funders are being affected by - and responding to - the COVID-19 pandemic. Including:   What is “delusional altruism”? Why does a scarcity mind-set affect so many donors and funders? Is this particular to philanthropy? Why is the “overhead myth” so prevalent, and why is it so problematic? Are there signs that funders are changing their behaviour during the current crisis? (Moving to unrestricted funding, trust-based grantmaking etc.) Is this likely to lead to longer-term changes? How many donors are willing to give away power as well as money? (And will the current crisis put even more focus on approaches such as participatory grantmaking?) Do we need to redefine what is perceived as “failure” in philanthropy? How many donors see funding advocacy as a course of action, rather than direct services? If it is less common, why is that? How can we balance the imperative to respond to short-term needs in a crisis with ensuring that philanthropy makes the most of its strengths in taking a longer-term view? What does this mean for current debates on spending down endowments? How should we rate philanthropy’s response to the current crisis? Will anything fundamentally change as a result of what we are going through? If so, what?     Related Links Kris’s new book, “Delusional Altruism” Kris’s author profile on Forbes Kris’s Alliance Magazine blog Kris on Twitter Our recent CAF Giving Thought blog and podcast on philanthropy & civil society post COVID-19.

In episode 75 we take a look at the key issues facing civil society and philanthropy during the covid-19 pandemic crisis and beyond. We explore the benefits of historical insight, highlight some of the main challenges civil society organisations face right now, and consider the most important questions to ask as we look ahead to the future. Including:   The history of philanthropy and civil society in times of crisis Centralization- what can we learn from C18th Hamburg and WWI in the UK about how crises lead to a desire to rationalise philanthropy? How do views on the causes of crises affect the philanthropic response? Religious views on plagues and the role of charity, and how the understanding of epidemic illness affects collectivism and mutualism. Poverty, Power & Inequality: The unequal effects of crises and the dangers- does philanthropy entrench inequality, or can it help to overcome it?   Key current trends Reduced income but increased demand. Many orgs in survival mode. Universal nature of crisis makes fundraising ask more complex (i.e. not “them”, but “us”) Enforced pivot to digital - how do you adapt to new tools and avoid pitfalls? Funder behaviour: unrestricted grants, core-cost funding, reduced reporting, trust-based grantmaking Collaboration, cooperation & coordination New digitally-enabled networks emerging alongside traditional charities     What might the future hold? Will we see a shift in public expectations of state vs philanthropic provision? Will there be a rebalancing of the mutual vs charitable tradition? Philanthro-localism or philanthro-globalism? Will the reputation of philanthropy improve or deteriorate? Are decentralised and networked organisational models an opportunity or a threat for civil society? Does the response to the pandemic highlight an unmet desire for participation? Will the current period of enforced digitisation lead to more CSOs engaging with the opportunities and challenges of technology? Is the short-term imperative to meet critical need going to lead to a longer-term desire to rationalise philanthropy? Will we see more transparency and sharing of data? Are we seeing the end of organisational ego in philanthropy? Will there be longer-term changes in attitudes to core costs, unrestricted grants and reporting requirements? Will we see a shift in perception/norms with regard to endowed assets? Will there be more recognition of the need for foresight among funders and civil society? Will the crisis create new problems for civil society to address?     Related Links Rhod’s HistPhil blog “Philanthropy in A Time of Crisis: Lessons from European History” CAF’s Philanthropy Stimulus Package proposal paper CAF's recent webinar on "Covid-19: latest insight on how charities and donors are reacting" Rhod’s Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy & Civil Society After Covid-19: Key questions for the future” Our recent CAF Giving Thought podcast series on “voices from civil society during Covid-19” Our podcast with Cassie Robinson from National Lottery Community Fund  

In episode 74, we talk to Cassie Robinson, Senior Head of the UK Portfolio at the National Lottery Community Fund, and a prominent writer and thinker about the intersection of tech, civil society and philanthropy. I a wide-ranging conversation against the backdrop of the covid-19 pandemic, we discussed:   How is the Covid 19 pandemic affecting National Lottery Community Fund and the organisations it works with? What has happened so far that should give us hope? Will the short-term, enforced digital transformation that many civil society organisations (CSOs) are undergoing right now result in longer term changes within the sector? And what support may be required for that to happen? What new challenges and unintended consequences might arise as a huge number of CSOs become reliant on platforms and digital tools? What role will civil society need to pay in ensuring that short-term policy changes re data and technology that are driven by the need to respond to the covid-19 pandemic do not result in longer-term human rights and civil liberties issues? Will funders and CSOs become more aware of/focussed on tech issues as a result of this period of enforced digitisation? Is civil society engagement on tech issues too narrowly-focussed on human rights and international development? What more needs to be done to engage wider civil society in these issues? We are seeing more focus on the idea of decentralised or non-hierarchical governance models for social change movements - do you think this will filter into wider civil society? What opportunities and challenges might this bring? Do charities and civil society organisations need to make a case for the continuing value of centralised or hierarchical structure in some cases? (I.e. can we “make infrastructure cool again” - if it ever was…?) What support can traditional funders give to networks and decentralised movements? Is the renewed focus on locality and place during the pandemic going to lead to longer-term shift towards ‘philanthro-localism’? Does the nature of the current pandemic crisis mean that we are seeing more focus on mutuality and collectivism rather than charity and philanthropy, and will this affect anything longer term? Will we see more funders and CSOs thinking in terms of collaboration and systems, rather than individual action, as we move into a post-covid future? Will philanthropy’s prominent role so far in the response to the covid-19 crisis lead to less criticism in the future? Or more?   Related Links Cassie’s Medium account, where she writes all sots of interesting blogs about her work with TNLCF and other projects. Eventbrite page for the Collective Action Labs work Cassie is doing with Rachel Coldicutt The Foundation Design Lab (Full Disclosure: I’m working with Cassie and others on this as part of the Foresight strand). The paper I gave at the ARNOVA 2019 conference on the strengths and weaknesses of tech-enabled decentralisation in civil society and philanthropy My Alliance Magazine article, “Riding the Tiger of Technological Change”

This is a conversation with David Ainsworth, from Catalyst.

This is a conversation with Dan Fluskey, Head of Policy at the Institute of Fundraising.

This is a conversation with Dan Sutch, Director of CAST (Centre for Accelerating Social Technology)

In the fifth compilation episode in our series of conversation with leading voices across civil society during the covid-19 pandemic crisis, we talk to: Dan Sutch - Director of CAST (Centre for the Acceleration of Social Technology) Dan Fluskey, Head of Policy, Chartered Institute of Fundraising David Ainsworth, Catalyst

This is an interview with Carol Mack, CEO of the Association of Charitable Foundations (ACF).

This is an interview with Virginia Anderson, Head of Fundraising at Bobath Scotland.

This is an interview with Will Moy, CEO of the UK's leading fact checking charity, FullFact.

This is an interview with Rich Collins from Sortified.

This is an interview with Holly Piper, Head of CAF Venturesome

This is the interview with Nick Temple, CEO of the Social Investment Business.

In conversation with Savraj Kaur from United in Hammersmith & Fulham about the role they are playing as a place-based giving scheme in mobilising local generosity in response to the Covid-19 crisis.

In conversation with Rita Chadha, CEO of the Small Charities Coalition about the challenges the Covid-19 pandemic is posing for small charities.

A conversation with Clare Kiely, Senior Investment partner at Comic Relief about their response as a grantmaker to the Covid-19 crisis.

In conversation with Rob Williamson, CEO of the Community Foundation for Tyne & Wear and Northumberland about their role in responding to the Covid-19 crisis in the North East of England.

A conversation with Fran and Will Perrin, founders and trustees of Indigo Trust, on why they have ramped up their grantmaking in response to the Covid-19 crisis.