Topic: The New York Times

American daily newspaper (founded 1851)

  • How Philanthropy is Helping Veterans Navigate the Workforce

    As Lekendric Doyle faced the end of his naval career, he wasn’t sure where to go next. But when he connected with the D’Aniello Institute for Veterans and Military Families, everything clicked into place. The organization, based out of Syracuse University, has several programs for veterans looking to jump in, or back in, to the workforce. For Doyle, it was the Onward to Opportunity program that stood out.  

    Doyle had no college degree, but through IVMF, he had the time and opportunity not only to get his project management certification, but also to complete his ​Lean Six Sigma Black Belt and his ​bachelor’s degree. Today, Doyle works for aerospace manufacturer Blue Origin, founded by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. 

    IVMF, Doyle says, “gave me the opportunity to seize my own time, and without doing that I would not have been successful in my endeavors. 

    “Time was the key piece, and the mentorship from the program, to really help me achieve that,” he adds.  


    Problems Persist During Transition Out of Service 

    For other veterans, the transition is not so easy. Only one in four have a job ready when they transition out of the service, per Pew Research Center. “Finding a job after their military service affects nearly 200,000 veterans every year,” CBS reports. “A U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation study from 2016 found that 53% of veterans are unemployed for four months or longer after leaving the military.” 

    Many veterans lack the degrees or certifications necessary to find gainful employment. Some find themselves out of a job, while others flounder at a poorly paying and unfulfilling career.  

    This continuing problem isn’t due to a lack of effort in the nonprofit world. But it may be made worse by some nonprofits that refuse to do more than throw money at the problem.  

    The most infamous example is the Wounded Warrior Project. In 2016, the nonprofit came under fire for spending “lavishly on itself,” per a New York Times exposé. The “country’s largest and fastest-growing veterans charity,” the paper reported, “has spent millions a year on travel, dinners, hotels and conferences that often seemed more lavish than appropriate.” 

    Top executives were subsequently fired, and the organization tried to rebrand. But a massive budget with little oversight is a recipe for disaster, nonprofit leaders say. Luckily, there are many veterans organizations committed to getting a real return on their investment.  


    Putting Veterans on the Path to Success 

    IVMF works with veterans and military spouses to help them succeed in the civilian workforce ​primarily ​through three programs:​ career training, entrepreneurship training and navigation of community services​. Onward to Opportunity, the career training program that helped Doyle, offers 40 different learning pathways, from training in information technology to business management and customer service, free of charge.  

    “It’s an excellent opportunity to help veterans transition, and it provides a supportive environment where you can start to look outward from the military and gain a grasp on what there is out in the world for you as a veteran,” Doyle says.  

    IVMF has built a diverse alumni network as well as an impressive slate of corporate partners, including Walmart, J.P. Morgan​ Chase, Fiserv​ and USAA.  

    Maureen Casey, chief operating officer for IVMF, says despite their unique skill sets, veterans can face a disconnect with ​potential ​employers, who aren’t always sure ​how military skills translate to the private sector.​​     ​ 

    “We need to ensure that there’s some cultural competency​ on both sides [employers and veterans]​,” Casey says. “Some of ​[veterans’]​​ ​challenges are going to be unique. We just have to help them overcome them​,​ and we know they will be very valued community members.” 

    Importantly, she explains, IVMF measures its success not ​only ​on the number of veterans it serves, but on their outcomes.  


    How Philanthropists Can Fund Effective Organizations  

    As philanthropists research organizations that help veterans find meaningful careers in the civilian workforce, Aaron MacLean, senior director at the Paul E. Singer Foundation and a board member at Philanthropy Roundtable, warns them against adopting a dangerous mentality.  

    “It’s easy to see ways in which a disconnect [between employers and veterans] could appear,” he explains. “But it’s important that philanthropists resist buying into a victimhood model or mentality about veterans.” 

    MacLean, who was an active-duty Marine for seven years, says although veterans may need unique assistance, they are not victims.  

    “You see in a lot of places in our society this notion of a veteran as this wounded bird that needs very special care and treatment to be reintegrated into society,” he says. “Generally speaking, that’s just false. I think, if anything, veterans are valuable to any employer.” 

    After all, veterans certainly develop many soft skills that could be beneficial to a potential employer. But they have hard skills, such as logistics, as well. The key is the transition.  

    “But I do think it would be possible to do harm, operating with an attitude where you’re encouraging people who are not victims to think of themselves as victims,” he says.  

    If traps for organizations focusing on veterans in the workforce include wild spending and lack of oversight, plus the danger of embracing a victimhood mentality, who should philanthropists look to as a success story?  

    Dan Goldenberg, executive director for the Call of Duty Endowment, says the nonprofit spent its first ​three​​ ​years as a “typical corporate philanthropy​ effort​.” They wrote big checks with little to show for them, he says, and large​, well-known​ nonprofit partners failed to show impact.  

    ​​In 2013​, the endowment moved to an accountability-based model. “W​e’re deeply skeptical about​​ ​trust-based philanthropy,” Goldenberg says.  

    This doesn’t mean underperforming nonprofits are left out to dry. In fact, the opposite is true.  

    Call of Duty Endowment currently supports 10 nonprofits with a turnover rate of “maybe 10% per year.” It ​assesses​​ ​the groups every quarter, ​reevaluating annually, ​looking for a strong ratio of veterans served to veterans placed​ into high-quality jobs​. ​This gives the nonprofits opportunities to improve. ​ 

    ​​For example, a number of grantees that were off track in their placement numbers turned out to have unsophisticated outreach capabilities, Goldenberg says.​ ​T​he quarterly evaluations helped the endowment ​identify and address this critical gap​. It was able to connect those groups to social media experts, ​fund​​ ​website improvements ​and​​ ​automate client service functions. ​The nonprofits were back on track within a year.​ 

    “​Conversations like this​​ ​are super helpful for coaching these nonprofits, but also for ​channeling targeted resources to improve their performance,” ​Goldenberg​​ ​says.  

    To ensure its money is going to the right place, ​the ​Call of Duty Endowment also doesn’t partner with organizations ​that haven’t passed its formal performance assessment and also presented audited financials.​​     ​ 

    “If you love an organization, you need to invest in systemically evaluating their performance,” he says. 

    Organizations that are held accountable continue to get better, Goldenberg says.  

    “​While we started with impact results similar to U.S. government programs, today o​ur grantees​ ​place veterans into jobs for 1/13 the cost of the federal government’s efforts. Last year, every $618 placed a veteran in a job.​ This has enabled us to fund the placement of 125,000 veterans—that’s a group two-thirds the size of the U.S. Marine Corps.”​​     ​ 


    An Urgent Need to “Step Up” for Veterans 

    While the government pours billions of dollars into the Department of Veterans Affairs, many veterans find it is too slow to meet their needs, or they are ineligible for VA support.  

    “Federal agencies do what they can, but it really needs to be a public-private partnership to fill in the gaps,” Casey says. ​The VA isn’t always able to provide certain kinds of support to families​, making IVMF’s support of military spouses key for transitioning families.  

    This is not to mention the VA scandal from a decade ago when an internal audit revealed tens of thousands of veterans were waiting 90-plus days to receive health care. Despite the controversy, the VA is still being criticized for its wait times.  

    The infamous failure of the government when it comes to supporting veterans leaves the door open for policy philanthropy, MacLean says. But “the lower hanging fruit, and what philanthropists who are interested in this subject should challenge themselves to do, is to be what philanthropy can be: the flourishing of civil society to take on challenges in ways that civil society can actually do best.” 

    The philanthropic sector certainly isn’t lacking in veterans’ organizations. Typing the word “veteran” into Guidestar yields more than 36,000 results. With so many options, the lack of accountability in some veterans’ nonprofits has harmed others, as less successful organizations essentially siphon funds from more successful ones.  

    “There are too many veteran nonprofits​ and ​precious few market forces to hold them accountable​.​​ ​​At the same time, ​the amount of money going into the space​,​ if anything​,​ is decreasing,” Goldenberg​ says​. ​“As a result, high-performing nonprofits are under-resourced, and low-performing organizations with big names are kept on life support.”​ 

    Meanwhile, there is an urgent need for results.  

    “The way we treat our veterans has become a national security issue,” Goldenberg says, adding that for the last two years, each military branch besides the Marines has missed its recruiting goals. “The perception is that veterans have bad outcomes after their service.” 

    That perception, he emphasizes, “is not a true story.” As Casey notes, veterans are much more likely to be entrepreneurs than the general population. According to Small Business Administration data from 2022, veterans owned nearly two million businesses and employed more than five million people.  

    “We should step up when they return and ensure they have every opportunity to thrive post-service,” Casey says.  

    And while high-profile scandals may have turned some philanthropists off from supporting veterans’ charities, they can still make a great impact if they find the right groups to support.  

    “There’s a saying in the military that amateurs focus on tactics, professionals focus on ​logistics​. Same for philanthropy,” Goldenberg says.  

    When funders throw money at the problem without oversight, they risk seeing their money wasted on overhead, excessive spending or programs that sound nice in theory but don’t really work. When funders and nonprofits work together to focus on measurable outcomes, they can help people like Doyle find a new career — and truly change people’s lives. 

  • 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.” 

  • 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.