This is a good idea! I think Longview and Effective Giving are already doing this to some extent, so it could be worth reaching out to them.
This is a good idea! I think Longview and Effective Giving are already doing this to some extent, so it could be worth reaching out to them.
I am definitely working on that. Early returns suggest that this type of approach is outside their strategic plan. I think option (2) is ideal, but I'm not sure they will be up for that.
Kyle -- good idea.
Somewhat related to private foundations, but also distinct in terms of organizations: I think EA should consider more organized and systematic outreach to the people who work in 'family offices', which are the small organizations that very rich families use to run their properties, investments, and donations. Sometimes family offices have their own private foundations, and sometimes private foundations are associated with family offices, but they're distinct things.
There's a Family Office Association that runs events, offers resources, coaching, etc. They might be worth learning about.
My impression is that outreach to the staff at small family offices might be more tractable than outreach to large foundations -- but that often, they have quite a bit of influence over charitable giving, and a lot of money under their stewardship.
(Epistemic status: I know very little about this field, beyond what I learned from watching the TV series 'Billions', and knowing a few families who have family offices.)
Great observation Geoffrey. One of the data points most important is to determine if the PF is a family foundation. I don't have much knowledge of family offices that don't include a PF, but that seems like a very smart group to target!
The name "Effective Foundations" suggests that the organizations it would be courting and trying to influence are not effective. Might want to consider a different name for an organization with the goal you set forth.
Fair point, the name is really just a placeholder.
Summary:
In this post I propose an organization that consults with US private foundations to encourage more effective grantmaking. The general consensus of EA’s I’ve spoked to working in this area is that existing private foundations are simply too intractable to be worthy of investment. However, I propose the usage of US private foundation tax filings to identify more-tractable private foundations based on several criteria. The hope is that this data approach allows this idea to cross the line from too-intractable to tractable-enough-for-investment.
Motivation:
Since 2011, GiveWell has directed $1 billion in effective gifts. Private foundations in the US hold over $1.1T and give ~$70B+ a year in grants, likely to largely ineffective charities. If even a small portion of these private foundations are tractable, the amount of grants redirected toward effective charities could be quite large. Impact will be measurable as engagement outcomes.
Tractability:
Tractability is the key challenge of this idea. From speaking with a few people in related orgs, the consensus seems to be that existing foundations are entrenched in their processes and mission and are extremely unlikely to be persuaded to change. For example, Charity Entrepreneurship mostly works with new private foundations for this reason.
I propose that the usage of private foundation tax returns (990-PF) may point toward tractability of even existing private foundations. A common response has been that foundation age is a critical factor, so starting with new foundations makes sense. Additional factors may be significant predictors of tractability (already give to international grantees, already give to highly effective charities, give to a diverse set of cause areas or cause areas associated with EA, information about their employees [low employees/assets may imply a smaller, more persuadable management structure]). It is possible that foundation age is the only significant predictor, and if so, solicitations could be mostly targeted toward brand new foundations, and these other factors could be used to create more personalized solicitations, potentially leading to greater tractability.
What would the org actually do?
Challenges:
Four potential outcomes I envision:
About me:
My name is Kyle Smith, and I am an Assistant Professor of Accounting at Mississippi State University. My research agenda is focused on nonprofit organizations. I am very interested in private foundations and have several studies using archival and qualitative methodologies I am actively pursuing. This post is a more refined summary of a prior post I made.
My questions for all of you:
I'd avoid prominent EA branding, jargon etc to minimise downside risk to the community.
Yes? If you have a bit of runway/flexibility, then it might be worth doing some of the above steps first so you have some indication of whether it will work. (Although it can take weeks/months from application to having funding offered/rejected.)
I probably wouldn't work full time on it myself, but would be happy to chat a bit more about it if that seems helpful.