In 2023, following the passage of the Donor Intent Protection Act in Kansas, Philanthropy Roundtable launched a monthly series on donor intent developments and controversies nationwide to better inform donors about this important topic. The Donor Intent Protection Act has now passed in Kentucky and Georgia as well, and efforts on behalf of this legislation continue in additional states.
This month’s Donor Intent Watch includes examples of foundation leadership changes which preserved donor intent, advice to higher education donors and data regarding donor intent from a new report on family philanthropy.
We encourage donors to contact us with any questions about our featured items and consult additional resources on donor intent at the Roundtable’s Donor Intent Hub. We also welcome any news about donor intent we may have missed.
Leadership Change and Donor Intent
In early November, The Chronicle of Philanthropy published The New Generation of Foundation Leaders is Younger and More Diverse, noting, “Philanthropy is undergoing what some are calling a sea change in leadership.”
The statistics are impressive.
“Many of the new foundation presidents are from Gen X. More women also fill the top spot. And perhaps most notably, the percentage of private foundation leaders who are people of color has grown by 40% since the racial-justice protests of 2020, according to a survey conducted by the Council on Foundations.”
I was quoted in the article, saying too great a focus on “radical” change would obscure the fact that while there might be changes in how new leaders would set priorities and manage and communicate, there would also be instances in which they would “adhere to the intent of the grantmaker’s original donor.”
Leadership transitions in all organizations inevitably lead to internal questions – and anxiety – about continuity of mission and operations. A narrow focus on those instances where new leadership has incited radical change in a foundation’s mission would, however, miss the bigger story – continued adherence to donor intent, even as leadership changes and operational processes evolve.
Hannah Skandera, appointed in 2021 as president and CEO of Colorado’s Daniels Fund, continues to follow Bill Daniels’ values in the range and manner of its grantmaking. The donor’s abiding patriotism is manifested in Skandera’s expansion of the foundation’s work in civics education. This includes a $4.5 million grant to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to scale the National Civics Bee to all 50 states by 2026.
Under the leadership of Romanita Hairston, appointed CEO of the M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust in 2022, the trust has explored the future of philanthropy and the many roles philanthropy can play beyond grantmaking. Whether acting as advocate, convener or knowledge generator, Murdock remains committed to strengthening the Pacific Northwest region’s educational, spiritual and cultural base by bringing innovation and additional capacity to the nonprofit organizations with whom the foundation partners. In short, the trust continues to adhere to and move forward Jack Murdock’s vision.
Though donor intent may be easily disregarded when the popular focus is on change, we must acknowledge and support donors determined to pursue values-based giving who carefully ensure their values and wishes endure
Read more here.
Advice for Higher Ed Donors from ACTA’s President
Recently, David Bass – who co-authored “Protecting Your Legacy” – and I interviewed Michael Poliakoff, president and CEO of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), about various higher education issues. We discussed the role of trustees, accreditation and campus climate. We closed with questions about higher ed donors: What’s your message to those who are about to give up on higher education entirely? For those who choose to continue funding in this area, what do you see as the most strategic opportunities to make needed changes?
Here is Poliakoff’s response:
“When engaging in philanthropy, it’s crucial to be intentional with your donations. Sometimes, it may be necessary to withhold financial support until certain reforms or conditions are met. Always aim to make donations that are carefully targeted, accompanied by robust gift agreements.
“For this purpose, we offer free advice through Arnold and Porter on drafting these agreements. Philanthropy Roundtable also provides support and recommendations to prevent any violations of donor intent.
“Our first priority is understanding donor intent and providing guidance to prospective donors. We explore various options, including, if necessary, taking a break from supporting one’s alma mater – a bit of tough love, if you will. There are many worthwhile organizations that truly value the opportunities donors bring to make a lasting positive impact.
“Donors have played a significant role in shaping higher education into a force for enduring, positive change. It’s vital to remember that it is their money at stake. If their ideas aren’t welcomed by an institution, there are surely other institutions ready to honor, cherish and implement those ideas.”
Read more here.
Troubling Philanthropy Trends Affecting Donor Intent
The National Center for Family Philanthropy recently issued Trends 2025, its third national benchmark survey of family foundations. Although it maintains, “Donor intent is still a strong influence in many foundations—63% report following it ‘very closely’ in terms of their focus,” the report also notes, “In 2025, foundation giving is less influenced by history, founder and family desires, and the interests of individual board members than in previous years.”
The report includes some statistics that may alarm donors who intend their family foundations to exist in perpetuity or even across multiple generations:
- “Families say they prioritize the engagement of younger generations at similar levels to a decade ago. However, the use of most strategies to encourage next-generation participation has dropped precipitously since 2015. For example, bringing next generation members on site visits has dropped by half, and allocating discretionary or matching funds for the younger generation has fallen by 19 percentage points.”
“For the most part, families are not reporting divisions among generations. However, families do report experiencing some shifts in generational dynamics that affect the philanthropy. For example, 35% say younger generations have less time for their family’s philanthropy. One-quarter report the cohesiveness of the philanthropy has been eroded by younger generations moving away from the primary geographical location. There is also an increase in the number of foundations reporting generational conflicts over wealth (this has doubled to 12%), social/political/religious views (doubled to 16%) and racial equity (which has almost tripled, to 11%).”
- “In 2020 and 2025 we asked family foundations to assess their effectiveness regarding operations and how well their family works together. Overall, fewer foundations say they agree their internal operations are effective (77% compared to 90% in 2020) and their family works well together (73% compared to 90%).”
Finally, there is some discrepancy in the data around donor intent. Although the report – as noted above – says 63% of foundations report following it “very closely,” survey results in another part of the report tell a very different story. Table 2, which includes data on factors that influence a foundation’s general giving approach, and “only includes data on those who responded that the factor influences their giving approach ‘a lot,’” says in 2015, 76% responded being influenced by “founding donors’ values and wishes.” In 2020 that percentage dropped to 67%, and in Trends 2025 to 58%.
Read more here, including instructions on downloading the report.
