SACRAMENTO, Calif. - In an effort to rebuild their tarnished reputations, the nation's biggest banks are touting their charitable contributions and community involvement. But on closer inspection, a new report says, they're not so charitable after all.

The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) has examined the contributions of four megabanks over five years. Report author Sean Dobson, NCRP field director, says the banks include making low-interest loans to for-profit companies, and employees' volunteer hours, when tallying their charitable giving, and overall, they spend a fraction of one percent of total revenue on philanthropy.

"They brag a lot about their charitable donations, and they brag loudest and most often whenever they're in Washington, D.C., lobbying lawmakers to try to water down financial reforms that will safeguard the public against fraud, abuse and another financial collapse."

The institutions in the report are Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Wells Fargo. Dobson says his group doesn't want Congress to be, in his words, "hoodwinked" by the megabanks' claims of generosity as lawmakers work on more stringent banking regulations.

Also in the report is an evaluation of how the banks fared in meeting NCRP's minimum benchmarks for responsible giving. These include using at least half of their charitable dollars to benefit vulnerable populations instead of, say, Ivy League schools, and giving nonprofits more flexible, multi-year grants instead of one-time amounts.

None of the four banks met those standards, says Dobson.

"In fact, these four megabanks, their philanthropy compared to other big financial institutions, is actually mediocre in terms of its quantity and its quality. And also, it lacks transparency; much of it cannot be verified."

He explains that a bank typically gives in two ways: through a separate charitable foundation, where the records are public and can be tracked; and from their own corporate treasury, which is private information and cannot be confirmed, even if the company is publicly traded.

See the report, "Take and Give," at blog.ncrp.org.




get more stories like this via email

A new report argued many charitable foundations need to examine the origin of their wealth and repair harms done.

The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy used publicly available information to examine how historic business fortunes behind some foundations were made. Drawing on historic examples of businesses profiting from systemic racism and discrimination, the report titled "Cracks in the Foundation" stressed the need for philanthropic organizations to do their own research, connect with Black communities, and move charity dollars toward repairs.

Claire Dunning, assistant professor of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, served on the report's advisory committee and said foundations can seek partnerships including local history centers to help with the process.

"This doesn't have to be a private, or sort of closed-off process," Dunning contended. "It can be one rooted in transparency and inviting people in. And again, that can be uncomfortable. But I would argue that's not an excuse to not begin this important work."

The report presented case studies tracking the economic history of eight foundations in the Washington, D.C., area. The study's authors said they seek to make difficult conversations easier and are presenting the case studies as educational guides for an accountability and healing journey.

In looking at historic harms, the report focused on four sectors: media including anti-Black rhetoric; housing including discrimination, segregation and displacement; employment including stolen labor; and health care including mental and physical harm and neglect. The report assessed harm using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Dunning stressed in looking to the historical record to find evidence of past harm, researchers must take a broad view.

"We need to think about how newspaper accounts or advertisements for a particular neighborhood that talk about restrictive covenants. That's a form of evidence," Dunning pointed out. "We can think about oral histories of people who are displaced from certain neighborhoods or who were denied equal wages in an employment situation, that's a form of evidence."

The Federal government requires private foundations to use their assets to benefit society. Each year they must distribute at least 5% of the market value of their endowment to charitable purposes.


get more stories like this via email

A new report said philanthropic organizations need to reexamine the source of their wealth, which it asserted often came from systemic racism and discrimination, and stressed the need to repair the harm done to Black communities.

Called "Cracks in the Foundation," the report from the National Committee on Responsive Philanthropy examines at the histories of eight grantmakers.

Katherine Ponce, research manager of special projects for the committee, explained how the report was developed.

"There's four categories of harm we focus on," Ponce pointed out. "It's anti-Black media and rhetoric, housing discrimination and segregation, unemployment and hidden opportunity, and then health care, both mental and physical."

The report urged grantmakers to reckon with their past, connect with harmed communities, work to repair the damage, make sure any harm doesn't continue and advocate for funding for reparations. While the report focuses on the Washington, D.C., area, it mentions California's Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans as an encouraging development.

Hanh Le, co-CEO of if: A Foundation for Radical Possibility, which commissioned the report and is one of the institutions examined, said her organization once believed the money to endow the foundation came from a health association jointly created by Black and Jewish workers when in fact, the agency initially excluded Black workers.

"Every foundation has an origin story that we believe ties the wealth that generated the endowment for those foundations to racialized capitalism, to structural racism," Le contended. "We all have an obligation to know that truth, to reckon with the truth and to repair the harm."

Debra Watkins, founder and executive director of San Jose-based ABEN, which stands for A Black Education Network, said to play a role in repair, grantmakers should invest in Black-led organizations, which still only get a fraction of the billions given annually.

"Foundations that have amassed their wealth as a result of harm done to Black people over decades, now have an obligation to fund Black-led work," Watkins urged. "And also to ameliorate conditions under which Black people still live."

On Giving Tuesday tomorrow, donating money isn't the only way to support the groups and causes you care about.

The global Giving Tuesday movement promotes "radical generosity," defined as "the concept that the suffering of others should be as intolerable to us as our own suffering."

Millions of people in the U.S. pledged a total of over $3 billion on Giving Tuesday last year - a 15% increase over 2021.

Philanthropy Ohio President and CEO Deborah Aubert Thomas said by occurring during the holiday season, Giving Tuesday lends itself to a particular type of giving.

"I think the timing of Giving Tuesday really gives the opportunity to focus on the things that we are all giving thanks for on Thanksgiving," said Thomas, "things that we know not everyone in our communities have access to - food and housing and just basic human securities."

Thomas said in 2020 - the most recent year for which IRS data is available - nearly 4,000 Ohio foundations donated $1.94 billion.

She explained that because fewer people itemize on their tax returns since the 2017 tax changes, it's hard to assess individual giving.

But prior to tax law changes, total giving by individual Ohioans was triple that of foundation giving. And the majority was by households with annual incomes of between $50,000 and $200,000.

She said children can learn about philanthrophy by sharing their "time, talent and treasures" at a young age.

"One of the best ways to do that is through community service and volunteering," said Thomas. "And through that learning about what the issues are in their communities, so that they can connect to what is sort of their passion and where they see they would like to make a difference, both with their time as well as through their giving."

Pointing out that philanthropy is defined as love of humankind and love of mankind, Thomas said it can start in your own neighborhood.

"Every community and even every neighborhood has unique needs," said Thomas. "And I think for folks to get off of their screens and learn about their neighbors and where there's need. I think philanthropy is - it's a state of mind as much as it is an activity."

The Giving Tuesday website reports that more than three-fourths of acts of generosity are non-monetary.

This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.




get more stories like this via email