TopicalBoost WordPress Demo

Author: TopicalBoost Demo

  • Denisha Allen (Merriweather) on Why Black Minds Matter


    Philanthropy Roundtable recently sat down with Denisha Allen (Merriweather), founder of Black Minds Matter, a “national movement to celebrate Black minds, support excellence and promote the development of high-quality school options for Black students.” Allen, an American Federation for Children senior fellow, is a champion for school choice and a Florida tax-credit scholarship recipient. Through Black Minds Matter, she hopes to help provide access to an excellent education for every Black student. 

    The interview below has been edited for length and clarity.  

    Q: You founded Black Minds Matter, a project of the American Federation for Children Growth Fund (AFC), in 2020, a time when many Americans were seeking to address social injustices in our country. What led you to create this organization and what role does it serve? 

    Allen: I came to AFC after working at the U.S. Department of Education with Secretary DeVos. I worked with the Trump administration for two years, and then came to AFC as a director of Family Engagement. Then, in 2020, I wrote an op-ed in Real Clear Education about my frustrations in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder. Our country was in civil unrest, maybe even the whole world was in civil unrest, and people were looking for ways to challenge racism. I wanted to bring attention to areas that would help Black America attain empowerment and excellence in all aspects of life. And, to me, that meant focusing on education. When I looked at the data, I saw that Black students are not reading on grade level or graduating from high school at the same rates as their white and Asian counterparts. I wanted to focus on changing that.  

    Unfortunately, at that moment in the national conversation, there was not a widespread initiative from the Black Lives Matter movement to talk about education and education reform. So, I coined the term Black Minds Matter to highlight that we need to focus on education freedom. We received a tremendous amount of support for what we stood for. And I’m proud that one of our first initiatives was to bring together a network of Black school founders. This was very personal for me because I went to a Black-founded school, and I benefited directly from the school choice movement.   

    Our mission is to nourish Black students with a rich education of their parents’ choice by any means necessary. Our goal is to expand our reach by engaging new audiences. This includes both Republican and Democratic elected officials, HBCU’s and our growing Black Founders Network. We are also committed to expanding our visibility through high quality content that can also be used to generate revenue for our work.  

    Lastly, we want to bring awareness about education freedom to the communities where Black students are most likely to be relegated to poor performing public schools. We have over 430 Black-founded schools in our online directory at www.BlackMindsMatter.net, and 150 Black school founders in our network. We were thrilled to have many of them in attendance at our second annual Black Minds Matter Summit in Washington, D.C., earlier this year.  

    Q: Can you tell us more about your personal connection to the work you are doing? 

    Allen: I went to a private school in Jacksonville, Florida, on scholarship from sixth grade onward. I failed the third grade twice because I couldn’t read. As you can imagine, I had very low self-esteem, and I was lashing out by starting physical fights. My life trajectory was going in the same direction as many of the people in my family who had all dropped out of school. When I switched schools, I went from getting F’s and D’s to getting straight A’s.  When I founded Black Minds Matter, I saw the opportunity to highlight Black-owned schools as a part of that narrative, since school choice had such a transformative impact on my own life. 

    Q: Your website says that nourishing Black minds with a rich education is the first step to breaking generational poverty and societal inequities. What do you mean by societal inequities, and how does education combat this problem? 

    Allen: In America, there’s a class issue and there are a race issues, and sometimes those issues get intermingled and intertwined. But, at the root of both of those conversations is our education system. And the data shows that Black and brown students are performing the worst academically in this country. Just to give you an example, the NWEA just came out with a new study that follows in the same vein as recent NAEP [The Nation’s Report Card] scores. They said students on the whole will need three to four months of additional schooling in order to catch up from recent learning loss.  

    Shockingly, they found Black students will need two additional months to catch up. So, you’re telling me that Black students will need five to six months of additional schooling to make up for learning loss. When the system is pumping out hundreds of thousands of Black students who can’t read or do math into society, they end up in the criminal justice system. We call it the school-to-prison-pipeline. That is a societal inequity. That’s a civil rights issue. Black kids are not able to read. We need to change that. 

    When we look at education in America, we need to ensure that no kid is relegated to poor performing or failing schools because of where they live. Students in poorer neighborhoods are not receiving the same education as students who are going to schools where almost 90% of parents own their homes. We can solve this socio-economic/racial problem if we can create a market where competition is going to create incentives that perform better for students. Education freedom allows parents to choose the best school for their child regardless of school type. I sit on the board for Step Up For Students in Florida – the largest school choice program in the country. In Florida, we’ve seen academic outcomes for students in traditional public schools increase with every expansion of the state’s scholarship program. That’s because everyone is competing for students.  

    Q: Our 2021 Simon-DeVos Prize Winner Bill Oberndorf, chairman of the board of the American Federation for Children, has called access to education the civil rights issue of our time. Do you agree, and if so, why is that the case? 

    Allen: I absolutely do. It is the civil rights issue of our time. One of the goals of Black Minds Matter is to help the public see that school choice and education freedom are a part of the longer struggle for freedom in the United States and have deep historical roots. The conversation has been led by policy folks for so long, which is important. But I really want to make it more approachable and accessible to everyone. When we talk about the history of freedom in America, it is inextricably tied to access to education, from slavery through the Antebellum period all the way up to today. The struggle has always been access to education.  

    One of the ways we are working to showcase the connection between freedom and education is by conducting exhibits that illustrate the extent to which slaves wanted to read. One part of our exhibit showcases findings from archaeologists who found “pit schools” or deep holes in the ground where they also found tablets and pencils for writing. The slaves understood that their freedom was rooted in the ability to read and write, and they risked their lives to try to attain those skills. I always like to say there is freedom of the body and also of the mind, and that has always been the goal of African Americans in this country. They have never been divorced from one another. 

    Q: The recent Supreme Court decision ending affirmative action in higher education could impact students throughout the country. How do you feel about this decision and why? 
     
    Allen: I think it’s going to be very obvious that we need better options for Black students, and this decision makes that clearer. Black kids are not reading on grade level and removing affirmative action in higher education means Black kids will have to perform even better academically to be accepted into colleges and universities.   

    Q: As you look ahead, what are you most excited about for Black Minds Matter? 

    Allen: I’m always very excited about the Black School Founders network. They are amazing, so to be able to support them and champion the work they do for students is very rewarding. Many of them have models that are worthy of replication. We are going to focus on capacity building and finding ways to support them. I’m also very excited to get more involved in states and districts with the worst academic and life outcomes for Black and brown students, and to advocate for better outcomes in the lowest performing districts in the country. For example, I get excited when I think about a city like Baltimore, where reading and math levels are abysmal. The creation of education savings accounts in that city will help students access better choices. Through projects like this, we are going to close the achievement gap.   

    For more information about this organization or others providing Pathways to Opportunity, reach out to Philanthropy Roundtable Program Director Erica Haines.

  • Donor Intent Watch: Controversies Around the Country

    In May, following the passage of the Donor Intent Protection Act in Kansas, Philanthropy Roundtable launched a monthly series on donor intent controversies around the country to better inform those who care about this important topic. This edition of our Donor Intent Watch again focuses on several higher education disputes, this month in Arizona and California.  

    We also have two disappointing updates, one on a Dartmouth College case we featured in May and the other on proposed donor intent legislation in Ohio. We encourage donors to contact us with any questions they have about our featured items and to consult additional resources on donor intent at the Roundtable’s Donor Intent Hub.   


    Discord at Arizona State University 

    Philanthropist Tom Lewis made headlines this month when it was revealed he had withdrawn his funding for the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development at Barrett, Arizona State’s Honors College. His decision ended a 20-year relationship between Lewis and his wife, Jan Lewis, and Barrett. Lewis has taken great care with his grants in higher education, and we featured him prominently in our donor intent guidebook, “Protecting Your Legacy.”  

    His philanthropy at ASU began with small grants to Barrett, expanded to significant scholarship offerings and culminated with the founding of the Center for Personal Development, which offered Barrett students innovative courses, workshops and a speaker series. At no time did he fall into the endowment trap, but instead structured larger awards as grants made in increments over a limited term, with continued donations dependent on satisfactory progress reports. “Start small and start short,” he advised other donors. 

    Lewis’s style of grantmaking made it possible for him to pull his support in the wake of campus protests and the alleged termination of the Center’s executive director, following a February 2023 presentation at the Lewis Center on “Health, Wealth and Happiness.” Lewis expressed disbelief at the “outrage” sparked by the event’s mostly conservative speakers, saying: 

    We expected some opposition, but I was shocked and disappointed by the alarming and outright hostility demonstrated by the Barrett faculty and administration. … After seeing this level of left-wing hostility and activism, I no longer had any confidence in Barrett to adhere to the terms of our gift, and made the decision to terminate our agreement, effective June 30, 2023. I regret that this decision was necessary, and hope that Barrett and ASU will take strong action to ensure that free speech will always be protected and that all voices can be heard.  

    While this is an unfortunate conclusion to what had been a productive relationship, Lewis has the satisfaction of knowing he did not leave funds behind in a perpetual endowment that would no longer align with his values.    

    Read more here and here.  


    Hastings College of the Law Changes Its Name to UC College of the Law, San Francisco 

    On September 30, 2022, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to change the name of University of California Hastings College of the Law to University of California College of the Law, San Francisco. Within a week, the Hastings College Conservation Committee, which includes alumni and six descendants of the law school’s founder, Serranus Clinton Hastings, filed a lawsuit against state and school officials.  

    The plaintiffs say the removal of Hastings’s name violates a contractual agreement made between Hastings and the state in 1878 when he made a gift of $100,000 in gold to establish the institution. Among other stipulations in that agreement, the lawsuit argues, was one which ensured that the school would forever be called the “Hastings College of the Law,” and which promised Hastings’s heirs the return of his gift —with interest —should the school ever “cease to exist.” That amount is currently some $1.7 billion. 

    The dispute erupted in 2017 when the San Francisco Chronicle published an op-ed calling for renaming the law school because its founder had encouraged and financially supported lethal violence against Native Americans in the 1850s. In response, a Hastings Legacy Review Committee was formed and commissioned a three-year study on the matter. The current lawsuit contends the study raised doubts about any direct involvement of Serranus Hastings in the deaths of members of the Yuki tribe.  

    The plaintiffs also note that, in September 2020, Hastings’s dean, David Faigman, recommended against any name change, but suggested instead that the school engage in “developing a true partnership between the descendants of those [S.C.] Hastings wronged and the school that bears his name, [which] will create substantive opportunities to transcend that history and live and work for common goals.”  

    When another article accusing Hastings of masterminding a massacre of Native Americans appeared in The New York Times in late October, 2021, however, the response abruptly changed. Within days of the article’s publication, the law school’s board resolved that Dean Faigman should collaborate with California’s state government to remove the Hastings name from the institution. A bill authorizing the change, AB 1936, was introduced in the California Assembly on February 10, 2022. It passed both Assembly and Senate without a negative vote in August of that year, was signed by the governor in September and took effect on January 1, 2023. 

    This will be a particularly interesting dispute to follow because of the use of legislation by California to invalidate the 1878 agreement. The lawsuit argues this is not only “an unconstitutional impairment of the state’s contractual obligations to S.C. Hastings and his descendants,” but it also “violate[s] constitutional prohibitions against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws, as well as the California Constitution’s requirement that the College remain in its existing ‘form and character,’ free from sectarian or political influence.” 

    Read more here. 


    Update on Dartmouth College Lawsuit 

    In the May 2023 Donor Intent Watch, we discussed a case at Dartmouth College concerning a 2002 restricted gift made in the will of the late Robert T. Keeler for the “sole purpose” of maintaining the school’s golf course. A second restriction advised the college that any funds not used for that purpose were to be returned to Keeler’s charitable foundation. In 2020 Dartmouth closed the course, but the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts Unit determined that because financial reasons spurred the closure, Dartmouth would be allowed to keep the funds and use them for “golf-related” purposes, including financial support of the men’s and women’s varsity golf teams. The estate of Robert T. Keeler filed a lawsuit rejected by a circuit court on the grounds that the estate of Robert T. Keeler did not have standing to bring such a suit. In response to an appeal filed by the estate to the Vermont Supreme Court, the decision of the circuit court has been affirmed by a unanimous vote.   

    Legal standing is all too frequently a stumbling block in efforts to protect donor intent, and in this case, the use of a will to convey the donor’s restrictions was insufficient to establish such standing. Dartmouth was ultimately successful in maintaining control of the funds because “the statement of understanding between the Keeler estate and Dartmouth that formalized the gift made no provision for the estate or the foundation to recover the money if the golf course was closed.” Donors should certainly consider bringing in legal representation to help craft a carefully worded gift agreement with the recipient institution – possibly one which names a contingent beneficiary with legal standing to sue.   

    Read more here. 


    Update on Ohio Donor Intent Legislation 

    Thank you to Jeff Moritz, son of Michael Moritz, for whom the Ohio State University College of Law is named, for alerting us to the outcome of proposed donor intent legislation in Ohio. Senate Bill 83 had passed the state Senate along party lines, with Republicans voting in its favor. That bill contained controversial higher education provisions, but included a donor intent protection amendment for endowment agreements between donors and state higher education institutions.  

    The bill was added to the Senate version of the Ohio biennial budget in mid-June, but to gain the support of the Ohio State Bar Association, the bill’s proponents had agreed to a reduced statute of repose and the inclusion of only those endowments in place prior to the date of enactment. In the end, because of widely acknowledged disagreement between the Senate and House over the bill’s higher education content, SB 83 was removed from the budget in its entirety. We will stay in touch with our friends in Ohio as Moritz notes they “will be regrouping and determining our next steps over the next few months.” 

    Mentioned on this page
    Native Americans in the United StatesUniversity of California College of the Law, San Francisco

  • True Diversity Advocates Respond to Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decisions

    In 6-3 and 6-2 rulings, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the use of race-based preferences in college admissions, writing “The Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause.” 

    President of Students for Fair Admissions Edward Blum, the organization that filed the lawsuits, applauded the ruling, saying, “The polarizing, stigmatizing and unfair jurisprudence that allowed colleges and universities to use a student’s race and ethnicity as a factor to admit or reject them has been overruled. These discriminatory admission practices undermined the integrity of our country’s civil rights laws.” 

    The Roundtable compiled reactions from our True Diversity partners, who signed our statement of principles. The True Diversity initiative provides an equality-based, holistic framework for embracing diversity that values each person as a unique individual and empowers charitable organizations with the freedom and flexibility to advance their missions and help those in need. Read the Roundtable’s official statement on the ruling here.   

    Ian Rowe, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and founder and CEO of Vertex Partnership Academies, which is a charter school serving high school students in the Bronx, said: 

    “Years from now, Black students admitted to top schools will say thank you Supreme Court for a decision that removes the perception the only reason I got in is due to my race. You re-established merit as the core criteria to be considered against a standard bar of excellence.” 

    For more from Rowe on how to provide pathways to opportunity for disadvantaged individuals, check out his book “Agency: The Four Point Plan (F.R.E.E.) for ALL Children to Overcome the Victimhood Narrative and Discover Their Pathway to Power.”  

    Devon Westhill, president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, whose mission is to “promote colorblind equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in America,” said: 

    “The Harvard and UNC cases provided the Court a great opportunity to clean up the mess it created by its decades-long experiment permitting a racial spoils system in college admissions. It has now seized the opportunity—on the 20th anniversary of its misguided Grutter opinion—to vindicate the American principle of equality under law. As a result, today we are a more perfect union, notwithstanding more work that lies ahead.” 

    The Center for Equal Opportunity filed amicus briefs in support of the plaintiff at every stage of these cases. Check out Westhill’s recent blog on this topic, entitled “Shall We Overcome: What is the Alternative to Affirmative Action?” 

    Stephanie Holmes, an experienced labor and employment lawyer and founder of BrighterSideHR, said: 

    “While the Court’s decision today is not directly applicable to the workplace, employers should take notice. Race-based preferences in the employment context have always been prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is the provision applicable to employment. In recent years, however, the proliferation of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (“DEI”) programs in corporate America, while well-intentioned, have increased the focus on an employee or applicant’s race or sex. This has provided incentives for employers to make hiring or other employment decisions based on protected categories, such as race, which is unlawful.   

    The Court’s majority opinion underscores the value and importance of treating all people – all employees – as the unique individuals they are in order to fulfill the promises guaranteed to every American in our Constitution. Even though the Supreme Court’s decision does not change existing law in the employment context, employers should be prepared for increased focus on and questions around their DEI approach. Employers are encouraged to use this opportunity to review their diversity programs and be prepared for questions from employees, who may have a wide variety of opinions on this topic.”   

    For more from Holmes, an author of our True Diversity toolkit, please read “True Diversity: Legal Overview & Recommendations for Employers.” 

    Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit that defends Americans’ liberties from government overreach and abuse, responded to the ruling in a Fox News op-ed. Legal fellow Ethan Blevins said: 

    “While this is a key win for individual rights, the court did not go far enough. The court should have held that race can play no role in university admissions whatsoever. Instead, the court has opted to prop up a feeble precedent that leaves the door ajar for ongoing discrimination.” 

    Pacific Legal Foundation filed an amicus brief in favor of SFFA in these cases. Read more about their  litigation efforts here.  

    Patrice Onwuka, Philanthropy Roundtable adjunct senior fellow and director of the Center for Economic Opportunity at the Independent Women’s Forum, said: 

    “As a society, we cannot remedy past discrimination by creating new inequities; otherwise, we lock ourselves into a vicious cycle of injustice. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that educational institutions must not infringe on the civil rights of one group of students based on their race regardless of whether some view the desired outcome as virtuous.   

     “Every child in America deserves access to a quality education regardless of race, ethnicity, national origin or class. Education is not only an equalizer, but it anchors the ladder of economic opportunity. If we want to ensure that disadvantaged children, including those from minority backgrounds, can compete for spaces in higher education, we should accelerate school choice efforts and be committed to holding all kids to the same high standards.”  

    For more from Onwuka on this topic, read her Philanthropy Roundtable research on the effectiveness of diversity quotas on corporate boards in “Improving Board Diversity: Lessons from Sweden and Norway.” She has also written about the pitfalls of charitable organizations collecting demographic data and using it to make philanthropic decisions. Read more here. 

  • Happy Birthday, America! Why Remembering Our Past is Integral to Our Future


    This year our country celebrates its 247th birthday – commemorating the 13 American colonies’ declaration of independence from Great Britain. The newly formed American republic was based on the idea that all people are created equal with fundamental, inalienable rights that cannot be taken or given away. As we continue to cherish our democracy and the American way of life, it’s worth remembering that its strength depends on our shared understanding of this country’s history and founding principles.  

    Sadly, civics knowledge has been waning for years, with many students unable to understand and explain how our government –and our civic society – actually work. According to a survey released this spring by the National Center for Education Statistics, just 22% of eighth-grade students were graded as “proficient” on a national civics assessment, a two point decline since 2018. It’s no understatement to say this downward trend of knowledge and understanding is dangerous for the health and survival of the American republic. 

    Fortunately, many philanthropists recognize this crisis exists and are dedicated to reversing its decline.  

    In April, Philanthropy Roundtable partnered with the Connelly Foundation and the Daniels Fund to host a National Civics Expo that highlighted 10 nonprofits (five Philadelphia-based, where the expo was located, and five nationally focused) that are doing exceptional work in elevating civics knowledge for students, teachers and parents.  


    Philadelphia-focused nonprofits: 

    The Union League Foundation 

    For 77 years, the Union League Foundation has hosted its Good Citizen Day program, providing an immersive experience in constitutional and civics education for high school students. The day culminates in a celebratory awards banquet, where each student is presented with a personalized Union League Good Citizenship Award. Over 18,000 young men and women have been celebrated and educated. 


    Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge 

    Located in historic Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, the Foundation seeks to preserve American patriotism and civic duty by providing high-quality history and civics opportunities, including seminars, workshops and site visits for students and educators. Students from across the country come to the Foundation to engage in the study of the principles of our Constitution and focus on understanding the U.S. political, social and economic system and the responsibilities of good citizenship. 


    Rendell Center for Civics and Civic Engagement 

    By supporting K-12 teachers and administrators to advance the learning of U.S. history, government and civics, the Rendell Center is restoring the civics mission of schools. The Center’s programs include hands-on, experiential learning activities like its Citizenship Challenge, an essay contest for fourth and fifth graders that provides an opportunity for students to express themselves on a current issue facing our democracy. The organization also offers literature-based mock trials, which combine literacy and civics to provide K-8 students with “the knowledge and disposition of engaged citizens.” 


    National Constitution Center (NCC) 

    Located on Philadelphia’s historic Independence Mall, the NCC brings the Constitution to life for people of all ages, nationalities and perspectives through “its interactive exhibits, rare documents and artifacts, moving theater programs and educational activities.” Last fall, NCC launched Constitution 101, a full online core curriculum for high school students designed “to provide a basic understanding of the Constitution’s text, history, structure and case law.” The Center is currently developing an edition for middle school students. 


    Museum of the American Revolution (MoAR) 

    The newest addition to the history and civics landscape in Philadelphia and the nation, the MoAR opened in 2017 and “owns a collection of several thousand objects including artwork, sculpture, textiles, weapons, manuscripts and rare books.” Operating under the belief that civics education is most effective with a lived experience-centered approach, MoAR focuses on powerful storytelling about “people in predicaments” and developing historical empathy. 


    National organizations scaling and building their programs: 

    Bill of Rights Institute (BRI) 

    With a network of 70,000 history and civics educators, thousands of classroom-ready history and civics resources and annual student and teacher programming, BRI equips students and teachers to “live the ideals of a free and just society.” By 2026, BRI plans to increase its teacher network to 100,000 educators who will “teach 10 million students each year,” and in 2024, will release a “digital resource in civics that emphasizes civil society and constitutionally limited government.” 


    Jack Miller Center (JMC) 

    Partnering with faculty, administrators and donors to change the way college and high school students learn about the history and principles at the heart of American political life, JMC aims to “bring our nation’s history and founding principles back into the minds and hearts of young Americans.” JMC is developing a Civics Consortium master’s degree, which will improve graduate education for civics teachers and strengthen the teaching of America’s founding. 


    American Legion Boys State 

    Founded in 1935 “to counter socialism-inspired Young Pioneer Camps,” Boys State “participants learn their rights, privileges and responsibilities as citizens and participate in legislative sessions, court proceedings, law-enforcement presentations, assemblies, bands, choruses and recreational programs.”  Active in each state for over 85 years, the COVID-19 pandemic greatly impacted its student engagement, and the American Legion is working to rebuild its reach throughout the country. 


    Institute for Citizens & Scholars 

    Urban and rural areas are the largest civics deserts in the country. With that in mind, the Institute is launching a Civic Innovation Fund to provide early-stage capital to entrepreneurs with big ideas on how to ensure 14- to 18-year-olds in these overlooked regions are civically well-informed. Bringing together innovators from the left, right and center, the Institute is building an ecosystem to develop and test new ideas to increase civic understanding. 


    Florida Civics and Debate Initiative (FCDI) 

    Established in 2019 as a statewide debate program focused on civics education, the FCDI creates access and opportunities for all students in this arena. Their programming uses “debate specifically as a tool to enrich civics education” and benefits from incredibly strong support from state leaders. The program has grown exponentially over the past three years and is now ready to work with other states to scale beyond Florida. 

    In the words of Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s founding fathers and its third president: “Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. … They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” Indeed, civics education is fundamental to our nation’s future, and as we celebrate Independence Day, Philanthropy Roundtable applauds the organizations working to advance education on this vital topic.  

    For more information on how to help protect and support the American values that strengthen our free society, please reach out to Clarice Smith, program director at Philanthropy Roundtable.  

  • Celebrating the Legacy of Julius Rosenwald This Juneteenth

    On Monday, the nation will celebrate its newest national holiday, Juneteenth. June 19 commemorates the day in 1865 when the last enslaved people were declared free in America.  

    One way to celebrate Juneteenth is through powerful depictions of freedom fighters and their efforts to achieve equality for all. Julius Rosenwald, who rose to become president of Sears, Roebuck and Company, is one philanthropist who comes to mind. Rosenwald, the son of Jewish immigrants, was committed to seeing Blacks improve their lives through education and self-reliance. He helped finance the construction of over 5,300 schools in 15 southern states between 1912 and 1932. His work contributed to the education of more than 600,000 Black students, including poet Maya Angelou and former Democratic Rep. John Lewis of Georgia. 

    Rosenwald and freed Blacks such as Booker T. Washington, whom Rosenwald partnered with, understood that education would be the key to uplifting Black people. Their new freedom was just the start of a long road to realizing the pathways to opportunity that our Founding Fathers enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. Through education, Rosenwald and others would help Blacks become economically independent.  

    Yet the challenges they had to overcome were great. In 1880, three out of four (76%) Blacks were illiterate in the South. By 1910, that rate had fallen to one out of three (33.3%). Nevertheless, over 40% of Black men were still illiterate. Rosenwald’s schools taught children and adults alike to read and become productive citizens, leading to tremendous outcomes. A Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago analysis in 2009 found that “The Rosenwald program accounts for at least 30% of the sizable educational gains of Blacks during the 1910s and 1920s.” 


    Creating a National Park to Honor Rosenwald 

    To honor Rosenwald’s legacy, in 2020, Congress directed the U.S. Department of the Interior to study the feasibility of designating sites associated with the life of Julius Rosenwald as a part of the National Park Service. This move stemmed from the work of the Rosenwald Park Campaign, an organization of volunteers dedicated to honoring Julius Rosenwald and protecting the Rosenwald schools by creating a National Historic Park. Philanthropy Roundtable joins hundreds of organizations in supporting this campaign. 

    Some of the very people who are now charged with creating the National Historic Park for the Rosenwald Schools understand firsthand the importance of Rosenwald’s legacy. Robert G. Stanton, the first African-American director of the National Park Service, noted:  

    “I personally experienced the pain and stain of segregation under the ‘separate but equal’ doctrine, attending a dilapidated two-room elementary school. With support from the NAACP, my parents and others filed suit in Federal District Court in 1949 to have a new school built in the community and eventually won the case. They were committed to quality education for their children, as were African-American parents throughout the rural south. We children also possessed what Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune called a ‘thirst for education.’ The Rosenwald Schools gave many African-American children access to educational opportunities that they would not otherwise have had.”

    In an effort to further promote and raise funding for this National Historic Park, the board of the Campaign commissioned a film entitled “Rosenwald: Toward A More Perfect Union,” directed and produced by Charles Poe, co-founder of the Parks Channel, a new social media platform for content about national parks. This film tells “The extraordinary story of a forgotten philanthropist, a Jewish son of immigrants from Chicago who became a champion for Black education in the Jim Crow South.” Recently, it received the award for best documentary short at the People’s Film Festival in Harlem, New York. 

    This film will be shown as part of the Fifteenth Film Festival in the Washington, D.C. area on June 18. Showing this film just before Juneteenth sends a powerful message that, as we remember the end of one of our darkest periods of history, there was a period of hope and inspiration that followed.  

  • How Charitable Giving Can Help Those Who Served: Q&A with Army and Navy Veterans

    In honor of Armed Forces Day and Memorial Day, Philanthropy Roundtable sat down with Kara Hirschfeld, U.S. Army Reserves veteran and digital marketing manager at Philanthropy Roundtable, and Rich Rodriguez, U.S. Navy Reserves service member and director of IT at Philanthropy Roundtable, to talk about their military service and the vital role philanthropy plays in supporting the military and veteran communities. 

    Kara Hirschfeld deployed to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom under the 82nd Airborne Division from 2009-2010. She served in RC East, Parwan Province and Bamyan with the New Zealand Kiwis. Her specialization was Military Intelligence, HUMINT. 

    Rich Rodriguez deployed to Central America to support counter illicit drug operations [in 2014] and the Middle East in support of Operation Enduring Freedom from 2016-2017, supporting multiple commands in the Southwest Asia area of operations. He currently serves as a Master-at-Arms with a specialty in ground combat. 

    The following interview has been edited for clarity and length. 

    Q: Could you share the reasons why you joined the military and your thoughts on overall differences regarding the sentiment of those who joined with you compared to the sentiment toward the military now? 

    Hirschfeld: Unlike many on the West Coast on September 11, 2001, I was up very early and watched the second plane hit the World Trade Center tower. I remember going to school that day and my math teacher told us her brother was going to deploy. At that point, I knew I wanted to serve our country. 

    A couple of years later, I started my first year at the University of Arizona and ran into a military recruiter on campus. The recruiter discussed the sense of patriotism he carried daily, what it meant to serve, how the military could prepare me for the real world and the benefits of helping with college. I was sold on everything. I raised my right hand for the oath of enlistment in a time of war, and little did I know at that time, it would forever change my life for the better.  

    I went in when America still rallied around President George W. Bush, picking up a bullhorn and standing on Ground Zero yelling, “I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you.” Military service members were dying in battle. War footage was on the news daily, and the hunt for Osama bin Laden was at its peak. Today, the honor of serving is not as clear. I hear from veterans and current military members serving today, “People don’t care about us.” Unfortunately, “serving our country” with patriotic pride seems to be a thing of the past. It almost seems as if “it’s not cool” to serve, and that’s evident in current recruitment numbers. I hope this can be turned around because it’s an honor to serve this country. The fulfillment, experiences and the lessons learned can never be taught in a classroom. 

    Rodriguez: My father, his father, his family, have all served this country in peacetime and in its conflicts since WWII. After 9-11, my father deployed to the Middle East in support of our country, its values and dedication to service. I had similar aspirations to serve and ended up enlisting in the United States Navy. I look back on the first time I wore my uniform, graduated boot camp, first deployment, as some of the proudest moments in my life.  

    It feels like the tides have shifted, and serving for duty and selflessness are no longer reasons for joining the service, but rather, benefits and financial reasons. We are now facing recruitment issues, and in some of our most critical communities, which in my opinion is due to the fact that we have service members at home that are not doing well physically or emotionally, or worse, tragically ending their own lives. I think the sentiment is if we can’t take care of our service members, why would I want to be a part of that? It’s unfortunate, as military service is a beautiful thing. But the lack of support and resources for our brave service members and their families is slowly peeling away at the new generations’ desire to serve. 

    Q: Since your military separation, how have you stayed connected to the military community and other veterans?  

    Hirschfeld: Within the first month of my deployment in Afghanistan, my friend was killed by an improvised explosive device. His sister created a nonprofit called Catch A Lift Fund, which serves post 9-11 veterans all over our country through fitness and mentorship. I volunteer for this organization and have helped them with development and media appearances to get the word out about their mission. 

    Rodriguez: My second deployment was in the Middle East for Operation Enduring Freedom, which is ironic as my father deployed in support of the same operation 15 years earlier [in 2001]. After getting back from that deployment, our unit had someone take their own life, which was incredibly tough for all of us. One of the things that my father and I got really involved in when we both respectively returned home was our local American Legion, Post 139.  

    In thinking about local community support for veterans, I had seen programs on the government side to help veterans’ post-deployment not be super effective. Our local Legions have recently partnered with George Mason University to give free family and legal services to service members and veterans, something that can be difficult to properly receive on the military side of things.  

    Q: May is National Military Appreciation Month, where we also honor service members on Armed Forces Day and Memorial Day. This month can be a hard time for service members, veterans and their families. What are some ways people can recognize those who are serving or have served? What are some ways people can offer support?  

    Hirschfeld: The best way that people can support our service members is to have honest conversations about the military and current events affecting them. Making a social media post once a year on Veterans Day to check the box is not enough. Nor is saying Happy Memorial Day when there is nothing happy about it.  

    The most alarming news I’ve seen recently is the record number of “cries for help” on the Veterans Crisis Line in March. It was the highest volume ever, even more than during COVID or after the Afghanistan withdrawal. Many say, “The war is over,” but there are decades of veterans that are suffering from multiple deployments, PTSD and other trauma stemming from service. We need to have a conversation on how to address their ongoing needs. 

    Rodriguez: It’s all about having hard conversations with service members, and volunteerism in your own local community. People might not actually realize service members need support, whether that’s a person to talk to or mental or physical health support. We live in 2023 where everyone has some kind of social media presence, which presents a great opportunity for organizations that can tap into their communities and can make veterans aware of events or opportunities that are going on.  

    I think a lot of people don’t realize the day-to-day sacrifices that military members and their families have made to keep our status as the best and most prosperous country in the world. Volunteering, or even saying thank you for your service, whether it’s on a social media post or if you see someone walking in uniform, really does go a long way. 

    Q: As veterans, in your experience, what are some of the most common needs of those returning to civilian life after serving? 

    Hirschfeld: Outside organizations are crucial to bridging the gap between active duty and civilian life. Programs that assist with fitness and mentorship, resume-building workshops and apprenticeships can tremendously help. So many skills learned in the military are equivalent to civilian jobs, sometimes our veterans just need assistance making those connections. 

    Rodriguez: I think there’s a specific point where you separate from active duty to civilian life that’s incredibly important that our current reintegration system is lacking. When you leave active duty, you take part in multiple reintegration efforts that are available and required through the military for its departing service members. I’ve gone through these programs and found them incredibly unhelpful. I think it’s a very, very critical, maybe three-month period that we’re just missing the mark on entirely, especially when it comes to job stability, family support and mental health when leaving the military.  

    I do think this creates a fantastic opportunity to have local organizations assist with some of these transition items—to really have that dialogue and have someone on the civilian side in local communities help service members through that transition.  

    Q: How important are veteran-centered charities, and how do they make up for when the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) or military falls short in addressing these needs? 

    Hirschfeld: There are some tremendous veteran-centered charities that address mental health, which is one of the top issues veterans are facing. I lived in Arizona during the VA waitlist scandal, where veterans died waiting for care. It became ground zero for Veterans Affairs health care reform. Reform has been made over the years, but we can still do much more for our veterans in the system and through outside charities. 

    Rodriguez: I hate to keep harping on health but it’s just such a big deal to me. When I was deployed, I had a shipmate who fractured his lower back. He went to the doctor that was on our Forward Operating Base (FOB) who essentially told him to “suck it up” and gave him some Tylenol. He still has back problems, but the VA claims it wasn’t service connected so he cannot be compensated for it. It’s a part of a larger problem, which leads me to believe I think there’s a big need for VA reform to get our veterans the care they actually need. There’s a lot of organizations that are trying to spread awareness and bridge this gap. Concerned Veterans for America (CVA) is trying to tackle some of these issues head-on from a policy perspective. 

    As a country, one of our biggest priorities should be making sure our service members are cared for mentally and physically. I think organizations that can supplement the care that the VA would provide are incredibly helpful and have been proven more effective than government solutions. At the bases I have been stationed at, they sometimes wouldn’t let us see people externally until we got a referral, which can take months and sometimes gets denied. Giving people the opportunity to seek out that care in the way that they think is best for them I think will go a long way. 

    Q: Are there any opportunities that you see where philanthropy and nonprofits can step up to help tackle some of the challenges and needs we’ve discussed? Is there a service or support that we are failing to provide that might be an opportunity for civil society to innovate and better provide than the government?  

    Hirschfeld: We need philanthropy and nonprofits to fill that gap where the federal government fails to help veterans. Too many veterans slip through the cracks and need help. The transition to the civilian world can be challenging for most. Creating that sense of community and camaraderie experienced in active duty, but in post-active duty, can save veteran lives. This can be through mentorship, fitness, therapy, sports teams, etc. Community is everything.   

    Rodriguez: It’s specifically around that three- to six-month window of your transition from military service. You can bring local community ambassadors into the picture to help with that transition, rather than have this process be driven by government programs that ultimately end up doing nothing. Nonprofits, local businesses and foundations have the agility to assist in having checkpoints with service members that are leaving the military on issues like physical or mental health care, supplementing costs of health care that the VA won’t cover or something as simple as a small grant for a work certification.  

    Q: What do you think is most important for donors to consider when evaluating and giving to veteran-centered charities? 

    Hirschfeld: Donors should look at two data points with the first being how many veterans are being served, and the second is the total administration costs vs. the funds actually helping veterans. Unfortunately, over the years, there have been too many fraudulent veteran charity schemes aimed at helping disabled and wounded veterans. It’s imperative to do your homework and ensure the organization is legitimate and the money is directly helping veterans. 

    Rodriguez: I would look at their financial disclosures to find out where the money is actually going, and what the split is for operational costs versus their programmatic work. Due diligence around organizations is incredibly important in making sure that the funds are going toward the cause you want to support. 

  • Donor Intent Watch: Higher Education Update 

    Legislators and others often ask us if donor intent violations are “real problems” or simply infrequent misunderstandings. Our answer is clear—they are indeed serious problems in philanthropy, and they occur more frequently than the general public might suspect. Following the passage of the Donor Intent Protection Act in Kansas, Philanthropy Roundtable is launching a monthly update on donor intent controversies around the country to inform the donor community, charitable organizations, public officials and anyone else interested in the preservation of donor intent. For additional resources on donor intent, please visit the Roundtable’s Donor Intent Hub.

    Our first update involves three higher education institutions.

    Dartmouth College

    Several years before his death, Dartmouth alumnus Robert T. Keeler made Dartmouth College one of the beneficiaries in his will by leaving a percentage of his estate to his alma mater. He was clear that any funds received were to be used for the “sole purpose of upgrading and maintaining its golf course.” In a 2005 agreement, the college was advised that any funds not used for that purpose were to be returned to Keeler’s charitable foundation.

    In mid-2020, Dartmouth announced that for financial reasons, it was closing the golf course but has not yet returned the remaining balance–approximately $3.8 million—to the foundation. The New Hampshire Attorney General’s Charitable Trusts Unit determined that because the course was closed for financial reasons, Dartmouth would be allowed to keep the funds and use them for “golf-related” purposes, including financial support of the men’s and women’s varsity golf teams. A circuit court agreed, and the case is now before the Vermont Supreme Court.

    Read more here.

    Middlebury College

    In 1914, in honor of the 50th anniversary of his graduation, former Vermont Gov. John Abner Mead offered a sizeable gift to his alma mater to build a chapel on the Middlebury campus. By the time the chapel was completed in 1916, Mead’s gift totaled $75,000 (over $2 million in today’s dollars). In the fall of 2021, Middlebury College officials announced they had removed Mead’s name from the campus chapel because of his support for eugenics policies in the early 1900s. Another former governor and Middlebury alumnus, Jim Douglas, is now representing the Mead Family and has filed a breach of contract suit against the college.

    Middlebury has claimed the Mead Memorial Chapel—which over time has become the iconic representation of the college—was named in honor of John Mead and his wife. Douglas included a copy of Mead’s original gift letter in the complaint he filed with the Vermont Superior Court on March 24, and that document indicates Mead’s naming intention was, in fact, to honor his ancestors. It is not clear how much the suit will revolve around the gift letter and what role John Mead’s early involvement in Vermont’s eugenics movement will play.

    Read more here.

    Valparaiso University

    In Indiana, Richard Brauer, the founding director of Valparaiso University’s art museum (now named the Brauer Museum of Art) and Philipp Brockington, an emeritus professor and benefactor of the museum’s collection, are suing the institution, its president and the state’s attorney general to stop the planned sale of three paintings. Valparaiso President Jose D. Padilla announced in February that the proceeds of the sale—estimated at $20 million—would be used to upgrade freshman dormitories to include “the amenities desired by incoming students and their families.”

    The paintings in question include “Rust Red Hills” by Georgia O’Keeffe (1930), “Mountain Landscape” by the Hudson River School’s Frederic E. Church (1865) and “The Silver Veil and the Golden Gate” by American impressionist Childe Hassam (1914). All three acquisitions were funded by Percy H. Sloan through a trust he established in 1945 that contained 400 paintings and nearly $200,000 in cash. The work by Church was included in the estate transfer; the O’Keefe and Hassam paintings were purchased by Richard Brauer in his role as museum director with funds from Sloan’s trust. According to Brauer, the trust agreement contains no reference to a deaccessioning policy, and a number of national museum organizations including the Association of Art Museum Directors and the American Alliance of Museums oppose the proposed sale, as does Valparaiso’s faculty senate.

    This case offers an interesting question about legal standing, which is frequently a barrier in donor intent lawsuits. Neither of the plaintiffs is related to Percy Sloan, but their attorney, Patrick B. McEuen, claims that because Valparaiso’s art museum bears his name, Brauer has a “reputational stake” and therefore “common law standing” in the litigation.

    Read more here and here.

    Mentioned on this page
    Dartmouth CollegeFrederic Edwin ChurchIndianaKansasMiddlebury CollegeNew HampshireValparaisoValparaiso UniversityVermont
    +4 more

  • Mental Health Awareness Month: How Nonprofits Are Helping Individuals in Need

    In honor of Mental Health Awareness Month, Philanthropy Roundtable is highlighting the innovative work of civil society in approaching one of the biggest challenges our country faces: mental illness. With one in five Americans experiencing mental illness each year, there is a significant opportunity for philanthropic leadership in helping to address the needs of these vulnerable individuals and provide support for their families.

    The realities of mental illness in America are staggering:

    • 46% of Americans will meet the criteria for a diagnosable mental health condition sometime in their life, and half of those people will develop conditions by the age of 14.
    • About 3-5% of the U.S. adult population has severe or serious mental illness.
    • 30% of adult Americans with serious mental illness receive no treatment (medication or therapy).
    • 10% of Americans with a mental illness are uninsured, with limited access to treatment.
    • Between 11-20% of veterans who served in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom experience PTSD and/or other mental health conditions.
    • 1 in 5 kids has a diagnosable mental health condition.

    The above realities are even more nuanced when considering that mental health issues contribute to higher rates of homelessness, hunger, substance abuse, domestic violence and other societal issues, including lower education outcomes for the next generation.

    The Roundtable supports philanthropists committed to fostering overall health and well-being, including those working to address the impact mental health issues are having on individuals and communities. We work to connect funders with organizations that provide vulnerable populations access to care and other resources. From foundations such as the Hackett Family Foundation, the Rees-Jones Foundation, the Marcus Foundation and others, philanthropists are approaching mental illness in ways that are having a positive tangible impact on people’s lives.

    While the mental health initiatives philanthropy supports are vast, below is a sampling of the innovative nonprofits and thought leaders who are making a difference in people’s lives all over the country:

    • Headstrong Project: The Headstrong Project is a nonprofit mental health organization providing confidential, barrier-free and stigma-free PTSD treatment to veterans, service members and family connected to their care. Headstrong’s growing clinical network focuses its capabilities across states where unmet mental health needs are highest. On average, Headstrong treats 1,400 clients per month through 275 clinicians in 15 states and Washington, D.C.
    • Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute: The Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute provides independent, nonpartisan, data-driven and trusted policy and program guidance to ensure all Texans can obtain effective, efficient behavioral health care when and where they need it. Their vision is to be the national leader in treating all people with mental health needs.
    • Stop Soldier Suicide: Stop Soldier Suicide’s mission is to reduce service member and veteran suicide using enhanced data insights, focused client acquisition and suicide-specific intervention services. Their vision is a nation where service members and veterans have no greater risk for suicide than any other American. In 2020, they served more than 700 service members and veterans and their work has reduced clients’ suicide risk by an average of 27%.
    • Treatment Advocacy Center: The Treatment Advocacy Center is a nonprofit dedicated to eliminating legal and other barriers to the timely and effective treatment of severe mental illness. The organization promotes laws, policies and practices for the delivery of psychiatric care and supports the development of innovative treatments for and research into the causes of severe and persistent psychiatric illnesses, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. In the past year, the organization was involved in passing 12 priority bills related to mental illness, including a federal bill and bills in Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, Virginia and Washington.

    Thought leaders and other resources related to approaches to mental health:

    • Dr. Sally Satel reviews Dr. Thomas Insel’s book “Healing: Out Path From Mental Illness to Mental Health” for The Wall Street Journal, discussing how few patients get the care they need.
    • Naomi Schaefer Riley’s op-ed in New York Post entitled “Too Many Children Are at Risk Because of Their Parents’ Mental Illness” discusses mental trauma passed on through generations.
    • DJ Jaffe’s TED Talk at the National Council for Mental Wellbeing evaluates how society may be responsible for misleading government officials into denying violence, rather than taking steps to reduce it with those who are severely mentally ill.
    • The New York Times highlighted the influence of psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey and his research over the past 40 years into involuntary psychiatric treatment policies for people with schizophrenia and other mental illnesses
    • A report published by Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Stephen Eide and Adjunct Fellow Carolyn D. Gorman articulates a concept to help those with serious mental health issues before, during and after crisis by focusing on a “Continuum of Care.”
    • Philanthropy Roundtable hosted a webinar discussing the effects of COVID-19 on the national economy and its relation to rising rates of diseases and deaths of despair.
    • Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Stephen Eide wrote a New York Post op-ed entitled “NYC can be a pioneer in the treatment of the seriously mentally ill,” which considers New York City Mayor Eric Adam’s plan for the city to be more proactive in dealing with psychotic individuals.
    • A Manhattan Institute report by Isabel McDevitt, co-founder of Work Works America, writes about the homeless in America who are able and willing to work, but policy fails to address the employment-based solutions that could better serve them.

    If you are interested in learning more about how Philanthropy Roundtable supports donors committed to addressing our nation’s mental health crisis, please contact Esther Larson, program director at Philanthropy Roundtable here.

  • Celebrating Faith-Inspired Philanthropy and its Impact on People’s Lives

    “Keep back nothing. Nothing that you have not given away will ever be really yours. Nothing in you that has not died will ever be raised from the dead.” – C.S. Lewis

    April means spring has sprung. It’s a somber and yet joyous month as people of faith around the world prepare for Passover and Easter, while others celebrate the beginning of spring.

    Spring holidays represent new life, though the sobering reality of these holidays, memento mori, is Latin for “remember you must die.” Though many of us will be hiding matzoh or Easter eggs in our homes or fasting, we are forced to acknowledge our humanness. And our frailty.

    It is this humanness and frailty that remind us of the historic stories which ground this holiday season. People of faith remember that 2,000 years ago the death angel passed over Israelite homes covered by blood on the doorpost as an oppressed people found freedom from Egyptian slavery. Christians remember that years later, a rescuer died on a cross to bring new life and hope to a people marred by separation from God. Muslims remember the revelations of the Quran which were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad during this month. We remember death. We celebrate life and freedom.

    As people of faith reflect on these values, we at Philanthropy Roundtable celebrate philanthropists who are inspired by faith values to invest in their local communities and beyond. We recognize their investments in communities throughout our country and world and their efforts which help improve millions of people’s lives.

    We acknowledge the following philanthropists for their significant generosity and commitment to philanthropy, each reflecting their unique expressions of faith commitments in their respective giving priorities. Please note this is not a comprehensive list but a sampling of those within the Roundtable community whose philanthropy is inspired by their faith.

    Connelly Foundation: Founded in 1955 by John and Josephine Connelly, the Connelly Foundation awards grants to nonprofits in the Philadelphia area that demonstrate outstanding performance in meeting community needs. Inspired by its Catholic heritage, the Connelly Foundation’s mission is to improve the quality of life in the Philadelphia region by supporting charitable organizations in the areas of education, human services, culture and civic life that strengthen resilience and help people to flourish.

    Gianforte Family Foundation‘s vision is to see individuals and families in Montana flourish spiritually and economically, and their mission is to support organizations that equip people to improve their lives in a sustainable way. Their giving focus is to support Christian organizations engaged in outreach work, strengthening families and helping the needy; organizations in Montana that work to improve education, support entrepreneurship and create jobs; and a limited number of organizations that enhance the local communities of Bozeman and Helena, Montana.

    Stanley M. Herzog Charitable Foundation’s mission is to catalyze and accelerate the development of quality Christ-centered K-12 education so that families and culture flourish. Its vision is for families and culture to flourish through quality Christian education. The legacy of Stanley Herzog’s career centers around making national transit ecosystems accessible and sustainable. Likewise, the legacy of his philanthropy centers around making the ecosystems of Christian education more accessible and sustainable for families across the nation.

    Murdock Charitable Trust: A co-founder of Tektronix, Inc., Melvin J. “Jack” Murdock was an entrepreneur who believed strongly in civic engagement and collaboration to serve the common good. Since 1975, Murdock’s legacy has led to significant investment in the communities of the Pacific Northwest through the M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust. Using a faith-friendly approach to its work, the Trust provides support both financially and with time and resources, through grantmaking, enrichment programs and convenings that strengthen the region’s educational, social, spiritual and cultural base in innovative and sustainable ways.

    The Rees-Jones Foundation: Founded in 2006 by Jan and Trevor Rees-Jones, The Rees-Jones Foundation is a private foundation that works with nonprofit organizations, primarily in North Texas, to serve others and improve their quality of life in tangible ways. The vision of the foundation is that the love of Christ is experienced in practical ways by those in our community who lack opportunity or who are suffering spiritually, physically or emotionally. The mission of the Foundation is to serve God by serving others, sharing his resources in ways that provide opportunities for the disadvantaged, relief for the suffering and encouragement in the growth and well-being of children and families.

    Learn more about how Philanthropy Roundtable can support how you can combine your values in your philanthropy here.

  • Saving the Arts from Politics and Presentism

    How philanthropy can support the arts in an age of activism

    Philanthropy Roundtable’s Values-Based Giving Program connects our donor community to high-impact organizations that advance our shared values of liberty, opportunity and personal responsibility. This story is part of our campaign highlighting how donors and nonprofits work together to improve lives. Interested in learning more about Values-Based Giving and the services our team provides? Click here.

    Lincoln Jones doesn’t like to talk about ballet. That’s because as the founder of American Contemporary Ballet, his Los Angeles-based company of 21 dancers that mounts some 70 performances a year, he thinks about ballet in a different way than most. “Imagine a theoretical art form that is populated by almost impossibly beautiful creatures,” he says. “Angels, practically, angels inhabited by pure rhythm, and moving in a way that is unmistakable proof of human nobility.”

    Jones’s reverence for ballet has meant going against the grain of traditional staging, bringing the art form to warehouses and open spaces where his audiences can be immersed in the performances. But his quest for independence also goes beyond the stage. In summer 2020, Jones found himself dancing on a newly unstable platform. Like arts organizations across the country, Jones was pressured to post a black square to his company’s social media accounts. The reason: to show solidarity with Black Lives Matter. It wasn’t just a request. It was more like a demand. Yet, Jones refused. One of the few arts leaders to do so, he faced a backlash that almost overturned his company.

    “In 2020, they tried to kill us,” he recounts. “The ‘black square’ swept the arts world. Everyone was supposed to post the black square in support of Black Lives Matter. I didn’t do it. For one, because I read what Black Lives Matter was and I didn’t support it. And, two, it was not my prerogative to represent the artists in my company politically.”

    For his sin of omission, Jones’s dancers were threatened. They feared for the future of their careers. They worried they would be ostracized from the world of dance. But Jones stood his ground, writing an open letter to his company explaining his actions. There were resignations and loss of funding, but his audience returned. Now, two years later, as other LA-based arts organizations still find their numbers down, American Contemporary Ballet is up and dancing to a sold-out run.

    “There is no thought of the moralizing and the guilt trips that now come with what should be joyful, personal and celebratory experiences,” Jones says of the impact of today’s politics on the arts.

    In contrast, for his company, “Not a single audience member has complained that we have not apologized for the land we are dancing on, or the music that we’re dancing to or the color of our skin,” said Jones. “They all just seem to want a good show.”

    Jones is now one of the signatories of Philanthropy Roundtable’s “True Diversity” Initiative, which published a statement of principles pledging to “return love, compassion and empathy to the diversity conversation by embracing an equality-based perspective.” His journey reveals the challenges of finding a middle ground in a culture that has become anything but neutral. The same is true for today’s arts funders who seek to stay above the fray of contemporary politics.


    The problem is that, in the past few years, mainstream arts organizations have become besotted with politics. Transcendence is out. Presentism is in. Arts for art’s sake? Today, it can seem more like art for the sake of climate change, social justice or racial redress. In the news, we now see activists storming museums to throw soup at paintings or glue themselves to the walls. Yet these outward convulsions often only mirror the vandalism from within. Mainstream arts leaders are attacking the legacies of their own institutions. The director of the American Museum of Natural History has overseen the destruction of her institution’s memorial to Theodore Roosevelt. The director of the Whitney Museum of American Art gave the green light to an exhibition that attacked one of his own trustees, who was forced to resign. The director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art has called his institution “connected with a logic of what is defined as white supremacy.”

    In a recent City Journal article, “Guardians in Retreat,” Heather Mac Donald decries the firing of the 82 volunteer docents at the Art Institute of Chicago and their replacement with six paid educators. The reason? The color of their skin. In the mantra of “diversity, equity and inclusion,” the museum claimed its docent program had “centered certain stories while marginalizing and suppressing others.”

    Mac Donald continues:

    “The racialist wave that swept the United States following the arrest-related death of George Floyd in May 2020 has taken down scientists, artists and journalists. Entire traditions, whether in the humanities, music or scientific discovery, have been reduced to one fatal characteristic: whiteness. And now the anti-white crusade is targeting a key feature of American exceptionalism: the spirit of philanthropy and volunteerism.”

    Beyond these racialized attacks, cultural philanthropy continues to find itself up against the notion that charity should be spent on only utilitarian concerns. The Princeton philosopher Peter Singer reflects this Benthamite attitude, named for English writer Jeremy Bentham, in his book “The Life You Can Save”: “Philanthropy for the arts or for cultural activities is, in a world like this one, morally dubious.”

    Singer pointed to the $45 million the Metropolitan Museum of Art spent on a Duccio painting in 2004 as an amount that would pay for cataract operations for nearly one million blind people in the developing world. “If the museum were on fire,” he wrote, “would anyone think it right to save the Duccio from the flames, rather than a child?”

    Of course, the choice is a false equivalence. Philanthropy is not a zero-sum equation. A dollar directed to a museum does not remove a dollar from a hospital, food bank or shelter. And the soul is a vital organ of its own. American philanthropists have long understood this call as they established a vital legacy of arts support. Without a monarchy, largely with support from the state, private philanthropy created and underwrote American cultural organizations in ways that have become the envy of the world and a reflection of the virtues of our democratic ideals. Unfortunately, for many of today’s progressive cultural leaders, these ideals are just the problem as they seek to overturn this democratic legacy and undermine American legitimacy. They check all of the boxes except the one that matters: as Jones puts it, the box for “human nobility.”

    For philanthropists who still believe in America’s founding principles, funding for the arts can be a dance of its own. Sometimes the answer is to go it alone—funding one’s own cultural projects. With support from the Morris and Alma Schapiro Fund, the painter Jacob Collins founded a school called the Grand Central Atelier in 2014—after taking on students informally for more than two decades—that is dedicated to reviving the classical traditions of art. His first students from the 1990s have become his faculty, and his school now attracts students and attention from across the globe. Likewise in 2009, Rick DeVos founded ArtPrize, a contemporary art competition and festival that has invigorated Grand Rapids, Michigan, by offering nearly $500,000 in prizes and attracting half a million visitors a year, with art displayed throughout the city.

    Fortunately, outside of the world of land acknowledgments, preferred pronouns and black squares, there are still partners to be found who value art for art’s sake and the freedom that spirit represents. Take Riverside Symphony, composer and cofounder Anthony Korf’s 41-year-old Lincoln Center orchestra that rejects identity politics through its concerts and music literacy program for inner-city school children.

    “We program music on the basis of its value, or the potential of a contemporary composer to achieve that stature over time,” he says, going against the DEI mandates of many of today’s foundation functionaries.

    Or consider the National Civic Art Society, the advocacy organization led by Justin Shubow promoting America’s classical vernacular as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

    “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us,” Shubow says, quoting Winston Churchill. “Our Founding Fathers were architects in their own right. They chose classical architecture to harken back to Rome and Athens.”

    What these arts organizations all share is a commitment to beauty and excellence that rises above contemporary trends and political convenience.

    The answer for today’s arts funders, one museum trustee tells me, is to look beyond the biggest organizations and the supposed prestige conferred by their board seats. Instead, he says, “Look to the second and third tier museum,” noting the abundance of local arts institutions that can still mount serious shows by flying under the radar of the Fords, Mellons and Carnegies and their progressive mandates. Join up with other connoisseurs, he advises, who don’t want to be led around by the nose.

    Likewise at Bader Philanthropies, one strategy of funding the arts is through its “Building Resilient Communities” initiative. “Through this strategy,” says the program officer Bridgett Gonzalez, “we are able to embrace the rich cultural diversity that embodies our local artistic community, exemplified through creative and traditional art forms.”

    When it comes to the arts, the solution, ultimately, goes beyond the politics of left and right. “There is a very specific political ideology that has taken over,” concludes Lincoln Jones. “It has for a very long time. This did not start in 2020. You have art that is politically based. And then there is art that is based on the human desire for connection and spirituality.”

    Nevertheless, to avoid the politics of art, it now takes some understanding of the art of politics and a willingness to dig deeper into the cultural organizations that expect your support. The question is not what is right or left, but what is right or wrong when it comes to the arts and the bravery to embrace, in English poet Matthew Arnold’s famous phrase, what is still “the best that has been thought and said in the world.”

    James Panero is the executive editor of The New Criterion.

    (Photo Credit: American Contemporary Ballet)

  • The Return of the Wealth Tax Debate

    Can the government tax charitable assets? A court case put before the U.S. Supreme Court may hold the answer to this question. By considering whether unrealized assets can be taxed, the courts could open the door for a new wealth tax covering assets within private foundations or charitable trusts.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently sidestepped the equal apportionment clause of the 16th amendment by becoming the first court in the country to state that an “income tax” doesn’t require that a “taxpayer has realized income.” In other words, this opens the door to the possibility that you can be taxed on income you didn’t receive (yes, you read that right).

    Last week, Competitive Enterprise Institute petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue in Moore v. United States.

    To understand what is at stake, we begin with investments. When the value of stocks and investments rise but are yet to be sold, they are called unrealized investment gains. These gains are not taxed according to current tax regulations until the investment is sold and the capital gains are realized.

    To illustrate, let’s say you purchased a painting for $1,000, and after a year, its market value rose to $1,500. As long as you haven’t sold the painting, the $500 increase in value is considered an unrealized gain, and you don’t need to pay taxes on it.

    The decision by the Ninth Circuit, if not overturned, could usher in a new era of federal taxes being imposed on properties, stocks, appreciating assets, possibly even jewelry, artwork, vehicles and household furniture.

    What’s more, opening the door to the possibility of imposing federal taxes on wealth would have profound implications for the charitable sector.

    Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, two well-known French economists who have provided advice to Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders regarding their proposed wealth tax plans, have suggested a new approach to calculating tax bills for wealthy Americans. This new approach would consider not only the personal assets of these individuals, but also the assets of their charitable foundations.

    The change would be significant, given that American charitable foundations provided  $91 billion to nonprofit organizations in the previous year. If wealthy individuals’ foundations were to see a reduction in assets, the communities currently benefiting from those donations would experience a substantial (negative) impact.

    In 2019, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation conducted an analysis of Warren’s proposed wealth tax on charitable foundation assets and found the tax would consume between 6% and 25% of the annual disbursements of five selected foundations, including the Dell Foundation, the Omidyar Network and Dalio Philanthropies.

    The history of wealth taxes suggests they are not effective and are frequently abandoned due to the economic damage they cause. Fifteen European countries have introduced wealth taxes over the last century, but only three still enforce them.

    In 2017, France eliminated its wealth tax after the prime minister acknowledged it was prompting the departure of 10,000 to 12,000 millionaires each year. This tax impeded economic growth and contributed to just over 1% of overall tax revenue, which is an inadequate return for the cost.

    Sweden, which is often cited as a progressive policy model, had a wealth tax for almost 100 years before abandoning it in 2007. The tax had virtually no effect on government finances while being blamed for significant capital flight. Germany also had a wealth tax, but it was deemed unconstitutional and abolished in 1996. Wealth taxes have not proven successful worldwide, and it remains uncertain whether the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the authority to impose such a tax.

    The 16th Amendment says “taxes on income” do not need to be apportioned among the states. This likely means that other federal taxes, such as a tax on unrealized capital gains and other wealth taxes, must be applied equally to all 50 states, according to population.

    Alabama, which makes up roughly 1.5% of the nation’s population, would have to produce roughly 1.5% of the revenue raised by the tax. But Alabama and seven other states have no billionaires, and California and New York combined have 43% of them, so equally apportioning the tax among the states would be impossible.

    As the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court is petitioned, the Supreme Court may issue a decision on this matter — it could have profound implications on the possibility of federal wealth taxes being imposed on the unrealized assets of Americans.

    Whether we consider the economic costs of a tax on unrealized capital gains, the historical precedent of nations abandoning wealth taxes or the question of constitutionality, the result would be less economic growth, fewer jobs and a significant reduction in philanthropic giving.

    To learn more about the impact of wealth taxes on charitable giving, read our policy primer here.