Anonymous donations to controversial anti-Israel groups shine a spotlight on the urgent need for donor-advised fund reform. Will this finally motivate Congress to pass much-needed legislation?
“Reshaping the Conversation: How to Rebuild Public Trust in Philanthropy.”
On September 26, “Reshaping the Conversation: How to Rebuild Public Trust in Philanthropy.”
“Philanthropy’s expanding footprint has spurred ongoing debates about how the nonprofit world is managed and regulated—a discussion I hope to contribute to in this column,” Kennedy writes.
The association executive talks to Craig Kennedy and Michael E. Hartmann about donor-advised funds, charity and politics, and the attention-getting op-ed in support of civility and pluralism in the sector that she signed with five others.
Carefully crafted, profoundly misguided.
What we are, and aren’t, saying to each other.
Conservative donors need to take a hard look at where their dollars go.
Egger: “I question openly whether those laws were designed by people to keep us right where we are. … [O]ur ultimate goal is to change the laws.”
Eisenberg: “[H]e strongly believes that the regulations governing nonprofits are too restrictive and should be changed to allow nonprofits to participate directly in political campaigns and partisan politics … and I heartily disagree.”
Adding a new entry—but still counting on one hand, maybe two.
A letter to the editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
The veteran reporter and commentator talks to Michael E. Hartmann about grantmaking and respect for individual agency, and the state of reporting and commentary on funders.
The veteran reporter and commentator talks to Michael E. Hartmann about his in-depth examination of Michael Bloomberg’s grantmaking against flavored e-cigarettes, and what it says about the nature and effects of much of progressive philanthropy.
And foster continued healthy discourse within and among all of them.
From more than a decade ago, thoughts an what can best and most reliably be done by foundations.
The arrogance of assuming all people automatically agree with “taking action” on a progressive agenda.