Fighting Misinformation, Grooming New Leaders, and Unlocking More Giving: Ideas for 2018

Some of the best writing in The Chronicle’s opinion pages in the past year focused on federal policy — including the pros and cons of ending the six-decade ban on charity politicking, the impact of changes in the tax code on giving, and the growing attacks on social-justice organizations in the Trump era.

But lots of other important ideas are percolating across the philanthropic landscape, and top thinkers shared them in our opinion section. Here are some key ideas that will be important in 2018:

The power of cash.

Benjamin Soskis, a philanthropy scholar at the Urban Institute, examined intensifying interest among donors about promoting a universal basic income — the idea that everybody should get a minimum, no-strings-attached sum annually. He followed up with a look at a groundbreaking effort by the nonprofit Give Directly to test whether giving cash — an approach the group has proven to work in Africa — can be adapted to provide aid to Texas victims of Hurricane Harvey.

Philanthropy’s role in fighting misinformation.

Elizabeth Good Christopherson, head of the Rita Allen Foundation, noted that all grant makers — regardless of their missions — have a stake in making sure policy makers and voters base their decisions on evidence and facts.

Two other notable pieces focused on this topic: Sarah Moore, a nonprofit marketer, offered ideas for how nonprofits can thrive in a post-fact world while Josh Wilson, a public-radio producer, urged grant makers to put more money into journalism projects that promote the public interest and to stop worrying about propping up failing business models.

Unlocking more donations for charity.

All the focus on federal tax deduction for charitable donations obscures the powerful role nonprofits have in promoting strong giving, argued Eugene Steuerle, co-founder of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

Protecting the planet.

Larry Kramer, head of the Hewlett Foundation, and Charlotte Pera, chief executive of ClimateWorks, offered seven reasons for hope that philanthropy can help curb climate change.

Meanwhile, Denis Hayes, head of the Bullitt Fund, and Dennis Creech, fund adviser to the Kendeda Fund, discussed how grant makers can use their real-estate assets — not just their cash — to promote conservation.

Aiding an overlooked group — the suburban poor.

Scott Allard, a University of Washington professor, argues that people just outside of the nation’s biggest cities are suffering because most donors think about poverty as a problem that affects just urban and rural people. Yet, he argues, the fates of big cities and the towns that surround them are interconnected.

Demand for a new type of leader.

Jeffrey Walker, chairman of the board of New Profit, noted that as philanthropy focuses more and more on transforming how entire systems work, rather than tackling a single project, the type of person suited to the role is quite different than what we used to expect. Today’s leaders must be good listeners, networkers, and learners, to become what he calls “systems entrepreneurs.

Calling out bias.

Bias against people of color is by far the biggest reason so few nonprofits are led by people who aren’t white, wrote Frances Kunreuther and Sean Thomas-Breitfeld, who co-direct the Building Movement Project, which conducted a sweeping study on nonprofit leadership.

Changing the status quo requires giving people of color more access to leadership networks and refraining from giving them too many extra duties, such as dealing with every problem related to race — no matter what their job responsibilities are, they wrote.

Henry Berman, head of Exponent Philanthropy, also made a call for grant makers and others to examine their own prejudices. Pledging more money and starting new programs is not enough to curb hate and promote diversity and equity. Grant makers must listen and learn to understand what kind of help is really needed, he wrote.

Unleashing corporate giving.

In the days after David Rockefeller’s death, Peter Scher, head of corporate responsibility at J.P. Morgan, noted that one of the philanthropist’s most important legacies was his push for corporate leaders to demonstrate commitment to the community with generous giving.

Yet, today’s companies are giving too little considering how much their profits are soaring, wrote Anne Lehman, a nonprofit consultant, as she urged activists to start a campaign pressuring companies to give a bigger share of their earnings. And Phil Buchanan, a Chronicle columnist, wondered about the power of business to promote the social good — and urged foundations to hold corporate America accountable.

Offering counsel for new donors, including one of the world’s wealthiest.

Simone Friedman, a top official of her family’s philanthropy, noted that too much expertise is locked up in foundations — and much of it could be put to good use as donors take on causes others have already studied. She suggested building an expert marketplace where foundations could share their best thinking with individual philanthropy.

More than 42,000 people shared ideas about philanthropy’s priorities after Jeff Bezos, who has given relatively little publicly, sought advice about whether his giving should focus on short-term or long-term needs. Gabrielle Fitzgerald, a philanthropy adviser and former Gates Foundation official, offered ideas for doing both. Perhaps in 2018 we’ll learn what path Mr. Bezos is choosing — and The Chronicle will be watching.