To achieve true engagement with philanthropists, charities need to look beyond the money, says Mary Glanville
On 19 February, twelve billionaires from Europe, Australasia and Africa publicly announced themselves as signatories to the Giving Pledge, joining the existing 90 (largely US-based) philanthropists who have committed at least half their wealth to philanthropic causes since the creation of the Pledge in 2010.
It had been a long road for Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, the originators of the Pledge, whose efforts to expand the initiative’s reach had been met with a lacklustre response, most notably in China and India. Was this due to a lack of philanthropic spirit outside of America, or reasons of cultural difference and desire for privacy as cited by observers?
The USA is a nation that is comfortable with wealth, that rewards financial achievement and philanthropy, and that is happy to recognise it in the media. This is not the case in Britain, as Beth Breeze’s 2010 More than Money report shows. Breeze analysed 418 articles which mentioned philanthropy from 2006: her analysis highlights that media coverage of philanthropy overwhelmingly focuses on wealth and celebrity, rather than the social impact of an individual’s philanthropy. The media’s negative attitude reached fever pitch during the tax cap debate of 2012.
Private matters
The media ought to recognise its role in the disinclination of the wealthy towards public statements of giving in this country. In a unique international survey of the Institute for Philanthropy’s high-net-worth donor network, 68 per cent of respondents estimated they would give up to half their wealth to philanthropic causes, with 26 per cent committed to giving at least half. Yet of this 26 per cent, less than half have signed up to the Giving Pledge or adopted its principles.
While these results indicate that the number of philanthropists who have made a commitment to investing most of their wealth is potentially much greater than the Giving Pledge campaign’s success implies, their desire for privacy is the most important factor in not signing the Pledge.
The Coutts Million Pound Donors report showed that the total value of donations of £1m or more fell from £1.3bn to £1.2bn in 2010/11, but identified a significant increase both in the number of £1m donations made by UK donors or given to UK-based charities, and in the number of donors giving more than £1m. While it may be tempting to focus on the fact that the net amount of money available has decreased, the increase in the number of donors is very encouraging for the sector at large. But again, finding donors willing to risk speaking about their philanthropy in public remains a challenge, and the greatest loss is to the charitable sector, not to the individual donor.
Going public
There are, however, donors who realise the benefits to becoming more public about their work. Not just to promote philanthropy among their peers – as the Giving Pledge seeks to do – but to champion a particular cause using their position in society, or to leverage resources beyond their own. An alumna of the institute’s Philanthropy Workshop, Marcelle Speller, created Localgiving.com, an online platform that enables individuals to search for small grassroots charities by issue area or locality and donate money to them. Through the platform, Speller facilitates donations to small social groups who may otherwise be overlooked.
Localgiving.com has also run several very successful matched funds: in one recent initiative, one-off donations generated two and a half times the match funding offered. By going public, Marcelle has enabled partnerships between Localgiving.com, government, communities and charities – a move which has effectively multiplied the impact of her initial investment in the website.
Money isn’t everything
Donors increasingly understand the benefit of public engagement in drawing attention to their philanthropic interests and bringing collaborators and partners to the table: charities also have a role to play in tackling negative perceptions and encouraging issue-driven public debate. I have heard donors referred to as ‘prospects’ and more surprisingly as ‘suspects’, and advice on ‘reeling them in’ was offered during a recent conference session for fundraisers I attended.
Charities sometimes focus on the amount donated and not on the social change that it achieves, and press coverage reflects this. More recognition could be given to the impact and the legacy factors. Charities need to look beyond the money and at how the donor can bring their skill and experience to supporting their cause. Many are committed to thoughtful and intelligent investment, so when talking to donors, focus on the issue and your role in tackling the problem in the wider context, not just on fundraising for your organisation’s project.
Your organisation then becomes the intermediary between the donor and the social impact: the donor invests in the social impact that the organisation delivers, rather than the organisation in itself. Approaching the relationship in this way could even achieve larger, longer-term donor investment and engagement in your work.
Mary Glanville is managing director UK at the Institute for Philanthropy
This article first appeared in The Fundraiser magazine, Issue 27, March 2013
