- “In a study sponsored by The Philanthropic Collaborative, economists Robert Shapiro and AparnaMathur concluded: “Each dollar that private and community foundations provided in grants and support in 2007 produced an estimated average return of $8.58 in direct, economic welfare benefits. As a result, the $42.9 billion in grants and other support provided by private and community foundations in 2007 produced some $367.9 billion in direct, social and economic benefits.” Robert J. Shapiro and AparnaMathur, The Social and Economic Value of Private and Community Foundations (Washington, DC: Sonecon, 2008), p. 2. Available online: http://www.philanthropycollaborative.org/FoundationStudy.pdf.
- “One of the great lessons of the 19th and 20th centuries was the recognition of this big space that exists between what is the public sector (government) and what is the private sector (business), and led to the development of our nonprofit sector. It is not a luxury, it is a necessity. It is essential to the healthy balance of society. And, if it withers, the quality of society degrades in a democracy…We don’t yet have a rational way of funding this vitally important sector of society. That is the challenge that philanthropy needs to face up to in the United States and globally in the 21st century.” —Richard Rockefeller, Chairman, Rockefeller Brothers Fundat the Opening Session of the Value of Family Philanthropy National Symposium
- “Below, drawing on the work of The Philanthropic Initiative, are three levels (above ground level). 1. Dormant but receptive: Gives when asked but passively. 2. Engaged, Getting Organized: May have a transactional vehicle, like a foundation or donor advised fund; getting engaged in causes; beginning to think strategically about philanthropic impact. 3. Committed to Philanthropy, Passionate about a Cause, Committed to Lifelong Learning about How to Achieve Impact” A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR PLANNING WITH PHILANTHROPIC TOOLS. Phil Cubeta, CLU, ChFC, MSFS, CAP, The Sallie B. and William B. Wallace Chair in Philanthropy at The American College
- “Traditional philanthropy entails giving money to a nonprofit. It is the nonprofit’s obligation to then get social results in line with donor intentions. A new view of philanthropy, termed “catalytic” by Mark Kramer, a former venture capitalist, now head of FSG Social Impact Advisors, holds that what matters are results and that the donor—if the donor has the vision, creativity, and wealth—is responsible for getting the social result. To get those results, the donor, social investor, or activist citizen may or may not give money to a nonprofit. Tax benefits are secondary to total social impact achieved measured against total resources expended. An example of a catalytic philanthropist is Thomas Siebel, founder of Siebel Software Systems, Inc. He owned a home in Montana and was concerned about rampant methamphetamine (“meth”) addiction. His research showed that potential users were ignorant of the consequences. Rather than writing a check to a nonprofit, Seibel simply did what needed doing himself. He hired an advertising firm and saturated television and radio with ads dramatizing the brutal effects of meth addiction. His Meth project, from 2005 to 2007, led to a 45 percent reduction in meth addiction among teens and 72 percent reduction among adults. Meth-related crime fell 62 percent.” A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR PLANNING WITH PHILANTHROPIC TOOLS.Phil Cubeta, CLU, ChFC, MSFS, CAP, The Sallie B. and William B. Wallace Chair in Philanthropy at The American College