The coronavirus pandemic and a nearly stalled economy have prompted many foundations to make major changes in their grant making.
Most visibly, at least 715 foundations have promised to provide new flexibility to grantees, joining in a pledge that was circulated by a handful of grant makers.
The nation’s biggest philanthropy, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, announced this week that it is now throwing all of the foundation’s work into dealing with the coronavirus. “We’ve taken an organization that was focused on HIV and malaria and polio eradication and almost entirely shifted it to work on this,” Bill Gates told the Financial Times. “This has the foundation’s total attention. Even our nonhealth-related work, like higher education and K-12 [schools], is completely switched around to look at how you facilitate online learning.”
Several grant makers have announced plans to sharply increase the share of assets they donate, including the Wallace Global Fund, which is distributing 20 percent of its assets this year. Jeff Skoll, founder of the Skoll Foundation, said he was planning to ensure the fund gives $500 million this year, quadruples its grant making, and spends more in 2021. And the Mary Reynolds Babcock and Libra foundations doubled their grant making this year to rush money out to grantees.
5 to Increase Grants
To better understand what is happening at Gates and other major foundations, the Chronicle surveyed and examined public statements from the 25 that gave the most in 2019, according to data collected by Candid. The Candid data is preliminary so some foundations may have given more last year as the research organization finishes its collection work but we based our look at what is known today.
Of these, five said they planned to or were very likely to increase grant-making levels this year: the Andrew W. Mellon, Charles Stewart Mott, the Joseph B. Whitehead, and Robert W. Woodruff foundations and the M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust. Eight said they planned to maintain their giving levels. The others either were assessing the situation or did not specify.. (The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation is a financial supporter of the Chronicle of Philanthropy.)
Nearly all had already committed money to rapid-response funds — just three had not or declined to answer the Chronicle’s inquiries — and 13 had made commitments of $10 million or more. Of the 23 foundations that had committed money to direct Covid responses, the average commitment stood around $35 million. The biggest so far came from Gates, which had commitments of more than $250 million as of late April.
Officials at the McKnight Foundation, which disclosed the smallest commitment toward direct Covid response — only $440,000 as of late April — said not all foundations are positioned to rapidly and directly respond to emergencies.
“We are not a disaster-relief foundation like others that specifically focus on immediate recovery efforts,” said McKnight’s Phoebe Larson in an email. “McKnight, for example, is a systems-change foundation. We address the drivers of systemic challenges, such as institutional structures, policies, market failures, public attitudes, and cultural norms.”
Larson also noted that it is supporting other organizations dealing with the fallout of coronavirus.
Grant makers are anticipating that the downturn in the stock market will lead to some belt tightening so many have put a freeze on hiring for at least some of their vacant jobs.
Not All Signed Pledge
While the big foundations are stressing flexibility for grantees in their public pronouncements, nine have not signed the pledge from the Council on Foundations.
Colby Reade, director of communications at the M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust said the foundation has a “general rule” not to sign third-party pledges.
“We prefer to speak for our own grant making and community investment strategies,” said Reade. “We agree completely that this is not a time for business as usual.”
The following tables detail grant making and policies at the 25 foundations the Chronicle surveyed.
