Rattling Skeletons in the Nation's Attic

H. PETER KAROFF says philanthropy works best when there is a clear understanding between donor and recipient:

The issues of donor intent, donor control and institutional integrity are as old as the practice of philanthropy. Anyone who has reviewed the letters between industrialist Andrew Carnegie and the more than 2,000 cities and towns across America that received his funds to build libraries cannot help but be impressed with the clarity of the terms: Carnegie knew exactly what he wanted to accomplish; the recipients were clear about their needs; and the bargain was spelled out in a tough contract that was probably no different from those that Carnegie used in his businesses. Key to the agreement was the mutual understanding that the philanthropist was offering support for something that cities and towns really wanted.

In my 13 years of experience advising donors at the Boston-based Philanthropic Initiative (a nonprofit agency that works with individual, foundation and corporate donors), I've seen too many large gifts that lack one of these characteristics. Too frequently, the donor's goals and the institution's expectations are not at all clear or are in fact incongruent (as was perhaps the case with Catherine Reynolds and the Smithsonian). The development side of the recipient organization often promises the moon – cultivating, handling and wooing the prospective donor. The donor, meanwhile, may be asking for the moon – expecting to fund something that goes against the institution's objectives or challenges its integrity. In the enthusiasm of the moment, these differences are not resolved, and a gift or commitment is made without a clear memorandum of understanding. Only after the fact does it become evident that the institution cannot -- or will not -- deliver.

These issues are becoming ever more challenging. While the demanding donor is not a new phenomenon (read Carnegie's letters), today's givers are looking for a more intense engagement in the philanthropic process. What they increasingly want is something quite different from the spin and the sell. They want a true learning experience, whether the cause they are donating to is science, art, kids or homelessness. Fundraising is no longer a business of donor cultivation; it is a business of donor education.

At the same time, donors need to distinguish between their own intent, their understandable desire for control and accountability, and crossing over the line into arrogance. It is appropriate for a donor to push the organization to do its work better, butnot to ask the organization to give up its intellectual standards and operational integrity.

The tension between giver and recipient is often healthy, and the resulting negotiation makes for some innovative and surprising gifts. When the passions, values and strategic objectives of the donor are matched with the vision, mission, goals and objectives of the organization or program, what transpires is philanthropic nirvana -- and what you get are gifts that are not withdrawn.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company