In this episode we talk to Sharna Goldseker and Michael Moody about their book Generation Impact: How Next Gen Donors are Revolutionizing Giving, which is now available in an updated and expanded 2nd edition. Including:

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

Related content:

• More detail on the book from Sharna’s 21/64 website
• Excerpt of 1st edition of Generation Impact in SSIR
• More on Next Gen philanthropy from the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy

In this episode we talk to Stelio Stefanou OBE, philanthropist and Founder of the For Baby’s Sake Trust (FBST) - a charity which focuses on working with parents to address the impact of domestic violence on the early years development of children. In a wide-ranging conversation, we discussed:

• Is “philanthropist” a helpful or unhelpful word?
• How does a business background shape approaches to philanthropy?
• Why is it important to recognise that success in business doesn’t automatically equate to expertise about social issues or the work of charities?
• Why is an evidence base so crucial to the work of FBST? How has the organisation worked with academics to build that evidence base?
• How important is it that philanthropy looks beyond addressing symptoms and tries to address underlying causes?
• Are there challenges to combining advocacy with direct provision of services, or do the two naturally go hand-in-hand?
• How has the pandemic affected the work of FBST?
• What, if anything, is the USP of philanthropy in relation to the public or private sector?
• Does the ability of philanthropy to work over a longer time horizon make it better suited to supporting early interventions?
• Do you see yourself as having any responsibility to encourage other wealthy people to give, or is giving entirely down to personal choice?
• Should philanthropists see themselves as having any responsibility to encourage other wealthy people to give, or is giving entirely down to personal choice?
• Is there a danger that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on people’s willingness to give?
• Des fear of “failure” hold some wealthy people back from engaging in philanthropy? How should we understand failure in philanthropy (and how is this different to failure in the public or private sector?)

Related Links:

• For Baby’s Sake Trust website
• Info on FBST’s approach to influencing
• Giving Thought podcast with Jo Kerr and Sonya Ruparel

In this episode Rhod sat down with Gemma Bull and Tom Steinberg, authors of new book "Modern Grantmaking: A Guide for Funders Who Believe Better is Possible". In a wide-ranging conversation, we discussed:

Humility & Funder Ego

• Why is humility such a key part of Modern Grantmaking?
• Is part of the problem that traditionally our idea of what it means to be “good at grantmaking” has revolved around attributing genius to funders and grantmakers in terms of their choices/program design, rather than on the extent to which they nurture grantees?
• Do we need to redefine what counts as success and failure in grantmaking?

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

• Does grantmaking have a diversity problem?
• Are funders more effective when they reflect more closely the people and communities they serve? In what ways can they achieve this?
• Do some grantmaking practices exclude people from already-marginalised communities? (E.g. focus on the written-word, invitation-based grantmaking etc.)

Privilege & Power

• Is traditional grantmaking paternalistic, and too often about decisions being made about communities rather than by them?
• The book emphasises that modern grantmakers should see themselves as serving the people and communities they fund– what does this mean in practice?
• Why is it so important for grantmakers to check their privilege, and what does this mean in practice?
• How do you navigate power dynamics within a grantmaking org- e.g. between trustees and grantmakers, or between philanthropic donors and the staff of a foundation?

Participation & Movements

• There is a growing amount of focus on participatory approaches to grantmaking at the moment as part of the solution to the criticisms being levelled at philanthropy. How much of the rhetoric is reflected in reality?
• Would all grantmaking be participatory in an ideal world? Or are there limits to participatory approaches? i.e. are there some situations in which it is better for expert funders to set aims and design programs? Or are there cause areas in which participatory approaches are not suitable for other reasons?
• Would it help if more funders supported grassroots organisations and movements?

Funding practices

• Are there signs that funders are changing their behaviour during the current crisis? (Moving to unrestricted funding, trust-based grantmaking etc.) Is this likely to lead to longer-term changes?

Risk and Innovation

• Many have argued that a key function of philanthropic funding is to drive society forward by taking risks and funding things that the state and market cannot – but how much current philanthropic grantmaking do you think meets this criterion?
• Is there a danger that “being innovative” becomes an end in itself, and results in continual chasing after shiny new things, rather than funding things that are already known to work?

Evidence and Impact

• The book argues that modern grantmaking requires more of a focus on evidence-based decisions- what kinds of evidence should grantmakers be considering?
• Do we need to ensure that different kinds of evidence and expertise are considered equally, in order to avoid perpetuating inequalities?
• What role can data play in making grantmaking more effective and equitable?

Related Links:

• Modern Grantmaking- the book
• The Grant Givers Movement
• Giving Thought podcast with Meg Massey & Hannah Paterson
• Giving Thought podcast with Nell Edgington
• Giving Thought podcast with Fozia Irfan