By Susan Wolf Ditkoff

A few weeks ago I had the honor of addressing the annual Jewish Federations of North America's General Assembly, a gathering of nearly 3,000 professional and lay leaders in the Jewish world. Our Opening Forum session also featured Alisa Doctoroff (Chair of the board of UJA-Federation in New York) and Michael Wagschal (a Senior Vice President at Bank of America Merrill Lynch). We had a highly engaging discussion with the many donors in our audience about practical tips to engage both the hearts and minds of donors in pursuit of excellence in philanthropy.

I was struck that a number of community foundations we’ve worked with at Bridgespan share similar challenges to those of Jewish Federations. Both must balance the donor and grantee sides of the equation by raising funds, managing funds, and granting funds wisely in their communities.

Unfortunately, both the Federation and Community Foundation worlds are struggling to stay highly relevant (with varying levels of success) to donors and their communities. In this regard, Federations and Community Foundations have a lot to learn from each other and the most successful folks among them. Perhaps most important to long-term success: They must engage donors “where they are” in their philanthropic journey, but at the same time educate, engage, and inspire those donors about the substantive needs and priorities of their communities—especially as those priorities change over time.

In the end, both must successfully grapple with demonstrating the unique value of their vision and ability to build community in an era when more and more donors are giving directly to causes they care about. It’s a difficult but crucial trick to listen/respond and simultaneously lead their communities by collaboratively creating the greatest results for the people and places they care most about.

In the vein of grappling with challenges, today’s #30DayDonorChallenge encourages you as donors to think of and ask a few tough—but fair—questions when you are asked for a donation.

That fair aspect is crucial: The trick is balancing your questions with the situations nonprofits face. For example, when talking about overhead, donor assumptions can be tough but unfair, largely as a result of unrealistic expectations. Learning more about the challenges nonprofits face can help you strike the right balance when asking questions of nonprofits.

For more on becoming realistic about nonprofits' overhead, see today's Wall Street Journal interview with Give Smart co-author Thomas Tierney, or read "The Nonprofit Starvation Cycle."


Susan Wolf Ditkoff is a partner at the Bridgespan Group and co-leader of its philanthropy practice.

By Susan Wolf Ditkoff

Thank you for the tremendous response so far to our #30DayDonorChallenge, which can be found here. More on this week's challenge below.

But first: Last week I had the pleasure of addressing the Partnering for Cures conference, convened by FasterCures, a Center of the Milken Institute. Partnering for Cures brought together people from all sectors of the medical research enterprise and others interested in saving more lives by accelerating the medical research process. I was honored by incredibly accomplished co-speakers—moderator Katie Hood (former Executive Director of the Michael J. Fox Foundation), George Vradenburg (President of the Vradenburg Foundation), Howard Fillit (Executive Director of the Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation), and others.

I was struck that many of the remarks resonated at personal levels (despite all of the science jargon around Phase IIA vs. IIB trials that flew around the room). In discussing the challenges and opportunities inherent when philanthropists use their funds as risk capital, we noted the difficult personal requirement of leaders (and boards of directors) to simultaneously hold themselves accountable for a particular set of outcomes over the long haul, and at the same time be willing to adapt that strategic clarity to changing circumstances.

I was particularly inspired by George and Howard's partnership in working toward a cure for Alzheimer’s disease. Their collaboration is substantive: There is shared money on the table and a shared sense of accountability around successful drug discovery and development. But most striking has been their ability to successfully adapt their approach over time—requiring deep personal trust and respect, a long-term shared strategy around the possible pathways to achieve those goals, and perhaps most important, a shared sense of being flexible (rather than rigid) about what it might take to get there.

This was just one example where clarity regarding each donor’s values and beliefs was a bedrock of success. In a related vein, I was also struck by how success for donors depended on a clear focus on shared outcomes and donors taking personal accountability for those outcomes—not just holding grantees accountable. And how important it is for donors to hear that message directly.

This leads me to this week's #30DayDonorChallenge theme. In this week we focus on your values and beliefs. It's Thanksgiving week, so we hope making a difference with your philanthropy will be top of mind as you celebrate with family and friends. We look forward to hearing about it!


Susan Wolf Ditkoff is a partner at the Bridgespan Group and co-leader of its philanthropy practice.

By Susan Wolf Ditkoff

This fall, I found myself drawn to the 30 days of GOOD challenge, a campaign that inspires readers to do one specific and actionable “good” thing each day. I recently wrote to my colleagues about how I liked its simplicity—Give three compliments. Send a postcard to someone. Ask someone for advice, and take it. And it was easy to stay up to date: I followed GOOD on Twitter (@GOOD), and the ideas came in little nuggets to my twitter feed. I tried to do as many as I could. (Though I also confessed that in candor, I fell short on mailing a postcard. Who has stamps anymore! I took a lot of teasing for that one, and a page of stamps from a sympathetic colleague.)

By Alison Powell

A few weeks ago, we wrote about some of the challenges facing families when they are left to execute on someone else’s philanthropic dreams. There are many families who meet this challenge with creativity and dedication. Consider the experience of Steven Hilton.

Having risen through the ranks of the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation to become its president and CEO, Steven was faced with interpreting the philanthropic intent of his grandfather, Conrad N. Hilton, for the present day. Fortunately, Conrad—founder of the hotel chain of the same name—had the foresight to leave clear but flexible guidelines. Written more than 30 years prior, Conrad's will advised his heirs to “relieve the suffering, the distressed, and the destitute” and to never allow people “abandoned to wander alone in poverty and darkness.” In his boyhood, Conrad was a great admirer of Helen Keller and wrote of her influence on him in his memoir. Today, the Hilton Foundation honors those words by investing in a host of causes, all focused on “improving the lives of disadvantaged and vulnerable people throughout the world.” A particular area of focus—preventing and treating blindness—honors both the words in Conrad’s guidelines and the spirit of his genuine admiration for Keller and her ability to triumph over great hardship.

The Hilton Foundation has funded the Perkins School for the Blind for over 20 years—helping it to transform from a school primarily serving people in the Northeast United States (including Keller) to one that has worked with more than 240,000 children, parents, and teachers in more than 65 countries. Perkins works with children who are blind, deafblind, or visually impaired, including those with multiple disabilities. This work has enabled the children to learn the skills they need to create productive lives, something they likely would have little hope of doing without Perkins’ reach.

How did the Hilton Foundation and Perkins partner for such results? First, they invested in a long, sustained engagement that created a strong partnership. Second, the foundation structured its financial support creatively. The Hilton Foundation gave grants, loaned money at below-market rates (in the form of PRIs, or program-related investments), and added to Perkins’ endowment to ensure there would always be a Hilton/Perkins International Program. Finally, the foundation focused significant funding ($65 million to date) on a relatively “niche” issue area. The result of this generous, longstanding, and thoughtful support is a level of trust and candor that gets results.

To read the full story on how this partnership has unfolded and what the results have been, click here.