Transparency Talk

Free Webinar: What Story Does Your 990 Tell About Your Foundation?
September 22, 2016

What does your foundation’s 990 say about the organization? 

Now that the IRS has started releasing e-filed Forms 990 and 990-PF as machine-readable, open data is available to the public. While this move will spur transparency and openness in the philanthropy field, foundation leaders may be uncertain of how open data and potential public scrutiny of philanthropy may impact foundation programs, staffing and investment management. 

Glasspockets recently partnered with the Communications Network to offer an insightful webinar on the Form 990’s potential risks and vulnerabilities, as well as how to use Form 990 to share the work of your organization. 

The webinar highlights the types of information included on the 990-PF, how the 990-PF data is being used now and in the future, and recommendations on how to communicate your foundation’s work through the 990-PF.

Check out this great webinar!

A Brief Analysis of the Clinton and Trump Foundations
September 13, 2016

(Jacob Harold is GuideStar president and CEO.  He has written extensively on climate change and philanthropic strategy; his essays have been used as course materials at Stanford, Duke, Wharton, Harvard, Oxford, and Tsinghua. This post first ran on the GuideStar blog.)

Nonprofits are a cornerstone of American democracy. They reflect the political diversity of the American people. That diversity is well illustrated by two institutions currently in the news: the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation and the Donald J. Trump Foundation.

GuideStar takes no position on elections and we will not comment on Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump as candidates for the presidency. We have, however, been repeatedly asked about the Trump and Clinton Foundations. Accordingly, we would like to offer a few notes of analysis on their structure, size, strategy, and transparency practices.

Clinton_GuideStar-1.jpg

Structure

Let us begin with a comparison of the basic facts. The Trump Foundation is legally categorized as a “private non-operating foundation” whereas the Clinton Foundation is a “public charity.” In simple terms that means the Trump Foundation is meant primarily as a vehicle for distributing grants from the Trump family fortune—although it also accepts funding from other donors. The Clinton Foundation is meant primarily as a vehicle for directly operating programs for the social good—while also making some grants to other organizations. 

Despite these differences, both organizations are, in a (non-legal) sense, “celebrity foundations.” They are seeded by money donated by their founders and also serve as a vehicle for members of the public to demonstrate their support of a prominent person. At their worst, celebrity foundations are vanity projects with negligible impact. At their best, such organizations channel fragmented resources and yield extraordinary impact for society. For example, the Michael J. Fox Foundation is known as one of the most sophisticated players in the fight against Parkinson’s Disease.  

Both the Trump Foundation and the Clinton Foundation are filed under section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. tax code, meaning they legally cannot engage in electoral activity. In general, they appear to have followed this requirement. There is at least one exception, though. The Trump Foundation made one donation to a political action committee associated with Florida Attorney General Bondi. It is not legal for a foundation to make a donation to a PAC; the Trump Foundation has paid a $2,500 IRS fine for this infraction. The the Trump Foundation characterized this as a clerical error although others have described it as a case of "pay-to-play politics." At the very least, this incident indicates insufficient controls and lax managerial oversight.      

Size

One thing is indisputable: the Clinton Foundation is far larger than the Trump Foundation. The latest comparable data from December 31st, 2014 shows the Clinton Foundation with assets of $354 million, compared with the Trump Foundation’s $1 million. The Clinton Foundation had total expenses of $91,281,145, versus $596,450 for the Trump Foundation. The Clinton Foundation had 486 staff compared to zero staff at the Trump Foundation.  

The Clinton family’s tax returns suggest that the majority of its charitable giving has been through the Clinton Foundation. Without access to Mr. Trump’s tax forms it is difficult to know the scale of his charitable activities outside the Trump Foundation. But it does appear that the dollars have not matched the pledges. An investigation by the Washington Post has not been able to validate that Trump has actually donated the money he pledged, instead finding, “Trump promised millions to charity. We found less than $10,000 over 7 years.” In addition, the last donation to the Trump Foundation by any of its trustees—family or otherwise—was in 2008. Indeed, David Farhenthold of the Post has suggested that the Trump Foundation has transformed over the last decade from "standard-issue rich person’s philanthropy into a charity that allowed a rich man to be philanthropic for free."

All told, the data at hand would suggest that the Clinton family has—at least over the last several years—donated more money (and at a far higher proportion of their wealth) than the Trump family.

Similarly, it appears clear that the Clintons have out-raised Trump. The Clintons’ fundraising for their foundation is one aspect of a broader fundraising portfolio totaling $3 billion over the last four decades. This is a remarkable number but they are not alone operating at this level: the Bush family raised $2.4 billion over a similar period. Trump has certainly helped raise money for both charitable and electoral efforts, but the total is undoubtedly less than the Clintons’. 

Fundraising at this scale takes place in a rarefied social circle. Each of these families—the Clintons, the Bushes, and the Trumps—must navigate a tangle of relationships with wealthy individuals. These relationships have caused some to claim that fundraising for the Clinton Foundation compromised Clinton’s role as Secretary of State. There appears, though, to be little evidence to support this claim. The Clinton Foundation signed an MOU in 2008 clarifying that Hillary Clinton would not have a role with the Foundation during her tenure at the State Department. And, indeed, funding for the Clinton Foundation decreased significantly during that period (2009-2013). A fair argument can be made that the Clinton Foundation should have been more aggressive in dealing with the perception of potential conflict. To its credit, the Foundation now proactively shares its key legal and audit documentation and has built a tool on its website to provide an additional layer of transparency about its donors (including both Donald and Ivanka Trump). 

Transparency and Strategy

Transparency is not a guarantee of effectiveness—but, in general, we believe that transparency is correlated with excellence in nonprofits. Transparency indicates an openness to questions and accountability. And, importantly, the act of transparency can force an organization to be clear about its goals and strategy.

Most nonprofits—including the Trump and Clinton Foundations—are required by law to file a regulatory document with the IRS, the Form 990. The 990 provides important baseline information but does not give a full view of the nuances of nonprofit work. Accordingly, GuideStar invites nonprofits and foundations to share additional data. Approximately 128,000 have done so. Some 34,997 organizations have provided enough to get one of GuideStar’s four “transparency seals”; of those, 1,061 have earned the highest level, Platinum. The Clinton Foundation is one of them. The Trump Foundation has provided no additional information and so has not earned a transparency seal. 

Trump-990_final_final.jpg

As a part of achieving a Platinum seal, the Clinton Foundation has provided a set of quantitative metrics about its programs. For example, one metric, “number of farmers benefitting from access to improved agricultural practices, increased yields, and enhanced market access,” rose from 66,124 in 2014 to 114,825 in 2015. Another, the “number of girls and women provided access to job skills training and livelihood support,” rose from 35,587 in 2014 to 48,696 in 2015. The fact that the Clinton Foundation provides such metrics makes it far easier for donors and citizens to meaningfully analyze the institution’s value to society.

The Trump Foundation provides no such metrics. Any analysis must therefore be based on the content of publicly available tax forms. These forms appear to indicate an unfocused generosity. For example, the below sample from the Trump Foundation's 2014 tax return includes grants to the Orthopaedic Foundation, the Palm Beach Opera, the Police Athletic League, Protect our Winters, and the Ronald McDonald House of New York. There is nothing inherently wrong with sprinkling many small grants in unrelated areas. But the Trump Foundation’s approach would certainly not meet the standard of focused, proactive grantmaking commonly called “strategic philanthropy.” 

TF_analysis_3.png 

Conclusion

Both the Clinton and Trump Foundations have been the subject of controversy while seeking to contribute to social good. They are undoubtedly different from each other in size, structure, and openness. Indeed, the two organizations reflect the perceived styles of the two candidates: one systematized, the other improvisational. Donors regularly decide which approach they prefer for their giving. Later this year voters will decide which approach they prefer for their leadership.

--Jacob Harold

Join Us for a Special Webinar: What Story Does Your 990 Tell About Your Foundation?
September 9, 2016

First impressions count.  What does your foundation’s 990 say about the organization?  The IRS recently started releasing e-filed Forms 990 and 990-PF as machine-readable, open data. This move will spur transparency and openness in the philanthropy field. 

It also means that open data is available to the public.  Anyone – from journalists to researchers – can aggregate this open data and make comparisons and correlations about philanthropy at lightning speed.  How will this impact the work of foundations, such as programs, staffing and investment management?

Glasspockets is partnering with The Communications Network to offer a free Sept. 14 webinar.  Through this insightful and engaging webinar, we will teach you about Form 990 sections that present potential risks and vulnerabilities, as well as opportunities to better share your institution’s work. 

You’ll learn:

  • How open data works
  • What the IRS is doing in relation to Forms 990
  • How the 990-PF data is currently used and could be used in the future
  • The types of information included on the 990-PF
  • How to analyze the story your current 990-PF tells about your foundation
  • Recommendations for better communicating your foundation’s work through the 990-PF

Don’t miss out on this free 2 p.m. EST, Monday, Sept. 14, webinar!   RSVP and sign up today.

YouthGiving.org: Opening Up the Power of Youth as Grantmakers
September 7, 2016

(Sarah Bahn is a former Foundation Center knowledge services fellow. She is currently pursuing a Bachelor of Arts in peace and justice studies at Tufts University. A version of this blog first ran on the GrantSpace blog.)

SarahbahnWhen I enrolled in the “Experimenting with Philanthropy” course at my college, I had the opportunity to work with a board of my peers to distribute $10,000 to local nonprofits. After so many years of being a dedicated supporter of the nonprofit sector—from childhood bake sale fundraising to volunteering at homeless shelters and completing summer internships—I finally felt like I was playing a real, powerful role in the social sector. I only wish I had known to get involved with grantmaking sooner.

Engaging youth in grantmaking increases their agency and leadership skills while also bringing much needed fresh perspective to the field. After the course, I became passionate about the need for young people, even children and teens, to act as real leaders in philanthropy.

BREAKING NEWS: They already are! When I started interning at Foundation Center this summer, I dove in to help with the launch of YouthGiving.org, a website that gathers and shares information about the youth giving movement so that young changemakers, and the adults who support them, can access amazing tools for youth grantmaking, like:

  • A funding map tracking youth-driven grants around the world
  • A program directory with over 800 youth grantmaking programs
  • Hundreds of resources about engaging youth in philanthropy
  • News about the movement, upcoming events, blog posts from experts, and LOTS MORE!

If this information had been easily accessible in this way when I was younger, I would have known that there are at least 14 youth grantmaking programs where I grew up (Washington state), 35 in Massachusetts where I attend school, and hundreds more around the world! It turns out that there are A LOT of people who are also passionate about young people being leaders in the social sector. Check out the Program Directory to find youth giving programs where you live.

“ Youth grantmaking is not just a cute group of kiddos running a lemonade stand for charity, although that's great, too!”

Thanks to YouthGiving.org making this philanthropic movement more transparent, the whole world can now see that there are tons of young people who are making real, tangible change in their communities. In fact, youth have made more than $14 million in grants since 2001 (check out grants data on the Funding Map) -- youth grantmaking is not just a cute group of kiddos running a lemonade stand for charity, although that's great, too!

YouthGiving.org connects members of the youth giving movement, elevates the stories of incredible young leaders, and  serves to make the field of grantmaking more inclusive as more young people can now see themselves as active leaders in philanthropy.  By expanding knowledge and collaboration about youth giving, more young people can access grantmaking opportunities and those who do will see the impact their peers are making across the globe. 

Transparency for the youth giving movement is critical because it illuminates the ways in which young people have been raising their voices to move the needle on the issues they care about. As this resource gains traction, I hope that other young people like me will know that they’re not alone in thinking that youth deserve a space at the grantmaking table.

-- Sarah Bahn

Eye On Sports Philanthropy: Serena Williams Courts Equity in Education
August 31, 2016

(Melissa Moy is special projects associate for Glasspockets.)

Serena Bio PhotoSerena Williams dominates the tennis court but few may know about her philanthropic efforts that target social justice issues.  

As one of the world’s greatest tennis players, Williams tied Stefi Graf’s record earlier this year with 22 Grand Slam singles titles.  Among active male and female players, Williams holds the most major singles, doubles and mixed double titles with a record 38 major titles: 22 in singles, 14 in women’s doubles and two in mixed doubles. 

Now the Olympian philanthropist is focused on winning the U.S. Open title after an unexpected upset at the Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, where she had hoped to defend her 2012 gold medal victory in London.  Williams and her older sister Venus Williams also lost the first round in doubles – another upset because the duo had a 15-0 Olympic record and three gold medals in doubles.

Serena Game - Slate
Source: Slate

 Breaking Barriers

The Williams sisters grew up in Compton, CA, where poverty and gang violence is common.  Their father Richard Williams coached the young girls at some of the city’s roughest public parks where gang members hung around the courts. 

“I’m a black woman, and I’m in a sport that wasn’t really meant for black people.”

The Williams family eventually moved to Florida in search of better training opportunities for the girls.  In 1992, Richard Williams shared his hopes that his girls would one day win at the U.S. Open and Wimbledon and inspire other Compton children and gang members that “they could do it.”

The sisters have broken barriers as female, African American athletes from a poor community who have exceled in a sport that is not known for its diversity.  White athletes, especially men, typically have more recognition, money and star power.  Additionally, sports like tennis and golf are often perceived as exclusive due to the cost of equipment, court and tee fees.  This financial disparity is consistently identified as a significant barrier that impedes multicultural players from getting into the sport, according to the United States Tennis Association.

Powerful and Personal Philanthropy

Off the court, the 34-year-old tennis star has focused her philanthropy on equal access to education and helping individuals and communities impacted by violence. 

Serena & Students - StandingAn opportunity arose when she first visited Africa in 2006 as part of a UNICEF health campaign, and in 2011, Williams became a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador.  Over the years, she has participated in multiple education initiatives that build schools in Africa and improve global education opportunities for disadvantaged children. 

The Michigan native has supported several UNICEF campaigns, including the World’s Largest Lesson, an initiative launched in 2015 to teach children in more than 100 countries about the Sustainable Development Goals; the 1 in 11 campaign that focuses on extending educational opportunities to marginalized children since 1 out of 11 children globally are not in school; and the Schools for Africa program, which raises awareness about UNICEF’s mission to provide quality education for the most vulnerable children. 

Through the Serena Williams Fund (SWF), Williams has also partnered with Hewlett Packard to build a school in Kenya as well other local organizations in Africa to open schools in Uganda, Zimbabwe and Jamaica.

Williams has made it a priority to fight for equity in education. “Now, sometimes in Africa they send only the boys to school,” Williams wrote in her Wired guest editorial. “So we had a strict rule that our schools had to be at least 40 percent girls. It was impossible to get 50-50 boys to girls, and we really had to fight for 60-40. But we got it… And hopefully my next school will be 50-50.”

Serena Kids Group Photo Africa
SWF also gives education grants to Serena Williams Scholars through a partnership with Beyond the Burroughs National Scholarship Fund, which gives scholarships to students “who have the drive to succeed but even with loans and other grants still fall short of reaching their dream to attend college.”

Another SWF priority – and perhaps the most personal one – is supporting victims and families of gun violence through The Caliber Foundation.  Williams has a personal stake in ending senseless violence since it is a “cause close to her heart.”  In 2003, Williams’ older half-sister Yetunde Price was shot and killed in Los Angeles.

Making Her Mark

Williams was the Sports Illustrated’s 2015 Sportsperson of the Year.  She was #55 on Forbes Magazine’s Power Women list in 2010.  In 2016, Forbes named her #40 on its World’s Highest-Paid Athletes list with $8.9 million salary/winnings and $20 million in endorsements, up from #47 in 2015.  For the last 12 months, she has also been the world’s highest-paid female athlete.  Over her career, she has earned $78 million.

Serena Wired COVER PhotoThe elite athlete continues to be a trailblazer.  In Wired Magazine, Williams shared her hopes for seeing “more women and people of different colors and nationalities” in sports as well as the Silicon Valley.  She added, “I’m a black woman, and I’m in a sport that wasn’t really meant for black people.”

Beyond philanthropy, Williams is leveraging this celebrity and influence to address issues she cares about.  She has spoken out against racism and pay disparity for minority athletes, and along with other African American athletes, she has vocally supported the Black Lives Matter movement. 

For Williams, philanthropy is personal.  She is focused on giving back in ways that address the inequities she experienced first-hand.  If her passion for philanthropy is anything like her focused drive and talent in tennis, she will leave a great footprint and an even better blueprint for future generations.

--Melissa Moy

Eye on Golden Philanthropy: Neymar Nets Philanthropic Goals
August 25, 2016

(Melissa Moy is special projects associate for Glasspockets. For more information about Olympians and their philanthropy, visit Glasspockets’ Going for Gold).

Neymar Gold Medal PhotoIn the midst of Olympic fever – when Brazil advanced in the quarterfinals – soccer phenom Neymar posted updates on Facebook and Twitter. 

He paused to promote his treasured Insituto Neymar Jr., which provides free education and health services for children in his impoverished hometown.

“One of my greatest achievements in life, to have the joy of creating the Instituto Neymar Jr. and see those smiles,” Neymar wrote on his personal Facebook page.  “Thank you God for making me able to give joy to the lives of these children and their families!”  

As one of the world’s best athletes and a Spanish FC Barcelona player, Neymar has earned comparisons to former Brazil and Santos forward Pele.  He’s racked up four consecutive Player of the Year awards, the 2011 FIFA Goal of the Year and league titles for Barcelona and Santos. In July, Neymar inked a 5-year contract extension with Barcelona, with an annual $16.9 million salary.

New York Times Soccer Kids
Source: New York Times

On the flip side, Neymar has also gained notoriety for partying with celebrities and repaying $51.7 million in fines and back taxes for tax fraud related to endorsement deals.  His temper has led to multiple penalties; and critics have questioned his conduct and sportsmanship.  Following Brazil’s first gold medal win in Rio, Neymar famously resigned as Brazil’s team captain.  However, the national team has not yet ruled out his return.

Neymar is a gifted athlete with an impressive online presence: more than 58.7 million Facebook likes; 57 million Instagram followers; and 24 million Twitter followers.  Earlier this year, ESPN dubbed him the world’s fourth most famous athlete, and Neymar topped U.K. media analysis firm SportsPro’s list as the most marketable athlete in 2012 and 2013. 

What’s interesting is how Neymar leverages his fame and global platform to draw attention to the causes he cares about. 

Neymar & KIdsPassionate Philanthropy

Neymar has targeted his philanthropy efforts toward impoverished communities in Brazil with a focus on clean water and sanitation, as well as education and health services for children.

The fiery and energetic Neymar has regularly partnered with Waves for Water to bring clean water ccto impoverished areas in Brazil.  In 2011, only 48% of rural Brazilian residents had adequate sanitation and 87% had access to improved water, according to WASHFunders.org, a Foundation Center collaborative project that tracks funding and data related to water, sanitation and hygiene.  Additionally, 3.53 deaths per 100,000 Brazilians were attributed to diarrheal disease.

“It makes me really happy to do something for these kids and their families.”

In 2014, Neymar leveraged his celebrity to new heights in a partnership with PayPal and Waves for Water through a global campaign tied to the 2014 World Cup held in Brazil. 

Since more than 3.2 billion people watched at least one live minute of the 2010 tournament in South Africa, this global water campaign banked on the World Cup’s popularity and PayPal’s global platform. 

The strategic campaign cleverly allowed fans to buy water filters for Brazilian cities with the bonus of an homage to the donors’ home countries.  For example, donations from the United States were used to buy water filters for Sao Paulo, where the U.S. soccer team stayed during the tournament.  And PayPal partner eBay auctioned off autographed Neymar memorabilia to boost the campaign proceeds.

Neymar KIDS INSTITUTEHowever, Neymar’s heart remains with his hometown.  In December 2014, Neymar launched the Instituto Neymar Jr. in Praia Grande, a coastal city outside of Sao Paulo.

The facility, which provides education and health services for children, is just a few blocks from where Neymar grew up on B Street in an impoverished community plagued with crime, drugs and unemployment.  It was in this neighborhood that Neymar played street games and futsol, an indoor version of soccer.

The soccer star values the opportunity to give back to his community, and he said it spurs him to excel professionally.  “It makes me really happy to do something for these kids and their families,” Neymar said in an in an ESPN story.

Neymar donated $6 million to the facility and also attracted additional sponsorship contributions to support the effort.  About 2,400 children, ages 7 to 14, attend the facility for two hours before or after school.  The children have free access to computers, dental and medical services, and can study English, Spanish and Portuguese.  Additionally, adults attend vocational classes in the evenings.

The institute is a family affair.  Neymar’s mother serves as the chief executive of the institute, and Neymar and his father spend time with the children. 

“I could not come to Brazil and not visit (the institute),” Neymar said.  “It’s my family’s dream, and I am always happy every time I visit.  It makes me want to keep growing this and doing this the right way.”

What’s Next?

With Neymar’s huge success and talent in sports, marketing, social media, endorsements and philanthropy at age 24, Neymar knows no limits. 

The next few years will be an exciting time for Neymar and soccer fans.  He will no doubt seamlessly continue to navigate player contracts and lucrative endorsement deals – $23 million in 2016 – with global brands like Nike, Red Bull, Gillette and Panasonic. 

With his tremendous fan appeal, social media and online presence, one can only imagine the awareness and improvements Neymar can bring to social justice issues in Brazil as well as the impact and influence he can wield in the philanthropic sector, from local to global levels.  All that to say… More, please.

--Melissa Moy

Why the Olympics and Other Major Sporting Events Usually Increase Inequality in the Host City
August 16, 2016

(Stefan Norgaard is Stanford University Tom Ford Fellow in Philanthropy at Ford Foundation. This post first ran in Ford Foundation’s Equals Change blog.)

Stefannorgaard_linkedinAll eyes are on Rio de Janeiro as it hosts the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. While everyone watches and roots for the athletes from their countries to win gold, few will realize that the ones really losing out are residents of Rio from low-income and working class communities.

This is because the development model for major international sporting events—like the Olympics and the World Cup as well as countless national sporting leagues like the NFL—rarely benefits all residents of the cities where the games are held. For example, even though the city of Rio promoted the Olympics to residents by arguing that hosting the games would increase tourism and lead to major urban infrastructure improvements, the likely result will be billons in losses.

In fact, thousands of low-income Brazilians have already been displaced in order to build infrastructure for the games that will largely only benefit wealthy communities. In addition, several contracting companies for the Olympics now face corruption allegations. What was seen as an opportunity to democratize development in Rio has instead become an opportunity for city officials to justify actions that would otherwise never be tolerated—like human rights abuses, forced evictions, and hiding poor people and neighborhoods away from view.

Olympic Rio Police Salary Protest

Sporting Events and Inequality

These challenges are not unique to Rio or the Olympics. During the preparations for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, FIFA—the governing body for international soccer—discouraged local authorities from upgrading an existing soccer stadium in a working-class neighborhood of Cape Town. The local government had wanted to modernize this stadium and invest in infrastructure in its surrounding neighborhood because it would help reduce inequality in the city. Instead, FIFA forcibly urged and got local authorities to agree to build a new World Cup stadium in a wealthier section of the city.

“The Olympics in Rio...human rights abuses, forced evictions, and hiding poor people and neighborhoods away from view.”

In Cleveland, owners of the Quicken Loans Arena—home of the NBA’s Cavaliers—requested a 50/50 public-private funding split for the arena’s construction amid critical financing concerns for the healthcare system, justice system, and other government agencies in the country surrounding Cleveland.

And across the United States, the Federal Communications Commission’s “Nixon Rule” allows NFL franchise owners to black out games from being locally televised if high-priced tickets do not sell out even though the stadiums where these football games are played are often built with taxpayer money. As a result, it can sometimes be nearly impossible for city residents to watch their home teams play in person or on TV.

Public spending for large sporting events is often justified through an economic development model that says investing in the infrastructure, marketing, and preparations for these events will benefit everyone. But time and time again, we see that with large sporting events, only a select few—usually wealthier and more privileged members of the community—benefit at the expense of everyone else.

An Equitable Development Model for Sporting Events

Cities and communities do not have to displace their working class residents to build sports stadiums and venues. They don’t have to funnel public funding away from public goods or only build infrastructure in wealthy areas in the name of economic development. Instead, cities can adopt an equitable development model for urban planning, which ensures that all city residents have a chance to benefit from major sporting events.

Olympic Rio ProtestWhat would such an approach look like? For starters, there should be a push for the Olympics and other major sporting event bids to more centrally take into consideration the impact of these events on low-income communities and the general public. These international bodies should allow and empower civil society groups to comment on Olympic development plans at an early stage.

It is important to note that major sporting event planning and the Olympic bidding process often start years before construction even occurs. So in theory there should be plenty of opportunities to engage with civil society and broader communities on proposed development plans. However, the Olympics has a compressed and frenzied bidding process that prevents broad citizen involvement and long-term planning. And once a bid is awarded to a host city, planners rarely want any input that would derail their already-approved plans.

While the Olympic host cities have generally not had a strong track record of creating long-term social and economic benefits for everyone, there are some instances where host cities have intended to do good for the broader community. For example, the 2012 London Olympic Games included a proposal to turn the Olympic Village into 6,000 units of affordable housing. Unfortunately, development for the games also led to widespread evictions. Urban regeneration schemes for Canary Wharf and elsewhere in East London—where the games were mostly centered—have led to intense gentrification post-Olympics. And while the London Olympic Planning Committee had good intentions, the results have been quite uneven.

In hosting the 1992 Olympic Games, the city of Barcelona leveraged the opportunity to develop a comprehensive urban renewal plan that helped create new jobs and transform the city’s deteriorating infrastructure by building a new airport and telecommunications network and improving the sewage system.

Philanthropy’s Role in Promoting Equitable Development

What can philanthropy do to ensure to equitable development models for major large sporting events and arenas benefit everyone? Here are some possible courses of action:

  • Lift up untold stories of injustice. For example, Ford’s investigative journalism grantees, such as Agencia Publica, are working to find cases of injustice related to the Rio Olympics and tell them to a broader public. They recently launched a project on the recent militarization of the Rio police in advance of the games.
  • Convene organizations and make civil society connections. What is happening in Brazil is far from unique and philanthropy can connect grassroots and civil society organizations in Rio with organizations in Cape Town, Athens, Qatar, the United States, and elsewhere. Groups can share common stories, brainstorm potential solutions, and consider new global development models for the Olympics, World Cup, other major sporting events, and domestic sporting leagues. 
  • Build community capacity to engage in urban development policies and debates. Community organizations such as the Observatório de Favelas in Brazil and the Sports Fan Coalition in the United States need critical capacity to build local power and to counter prevailing assertions that major sporting events always leave lasting social and economic benefits for everyone. The Ford Foundation’s commitment to building institutions and networks seeks to support and grow social justice institutions—which often outlive any one battle or campaign—to do just this.

Major sporting events can ignite a city’s spirit and civic capacity, can lead to a sense of citywide pride, and can certainly help to increase tourism and economic stimulus. But major sporting events and projects only benefit everyone when they are deliberately designed to do so. If we change the approach to development, large sporting events like the Olympics can reduce, rather than drive, inequality.

--Stefan Norgaard

Eye on Golden Philanthropy: Michael Phelps Expands the Pool of Future Olympians
August 11, 2016

(Melissa Moy is special projects associate for Glasspockets. For more information about Olympians and their philanthropy, visit Glasspockets’ Going for Gold.)

Michael Phelps Rio PHOTOIf recent history is any indication, Olympic veteran Michael Phelps will make a huge splash at the Olympic Games in Rio. 

As the most decorated Olympian in history, Phelps debuted as the U.S. flag bearer in this Summer Olympics’s Parade of Nations during the Opening Ceremony. 

In the last few days, he earned gold medals in the men’s 4x100m freestyle relay, 200m butterfly, 4x200m freestyle relay and 200m individual medley.  He now has a record 22 gold medals, with a total of 26 Olympic medals.  Not bad for a “retiree.”  Phelps famously retired after the 2012 Olympics in London, and returned to the sport in 2014.

Michael Phelps NBC News
Source: NBC News

Phelps, 31, has earned numerous accolades over the years: Sports Illustrateds 2008 Sportsman of the Year; Swimming World Magazine’s World Swimmer of the Year Award, seven times; American Swimmer of the Year Award, 10 times; and the FINA Swimmer of the Year in 2012. 

The Maryland native’s performance at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing was phenomenal.  For tying Mark Spitz’s record of seven gold medals and ultimately setting a new record of eight gold medals, Phelps earned a $1 million bonus from his longtime sponsor Speedo. He used his bonus to start the Michael Phelps Foundation, which focuses on promoting healthy, active lives, especially for children, primarily by expanding opportunities for participation in the sport of swimming.

Building the Sport by Increasing Access to Swimming

In his letter on the foundation website, Phelps described his commitment to help youth enjoy safe swimming and healthy living.  “Swimming provided the opportunity to stay healthy while I learned about hard work, determination, and setting goals,” he said.

It may be surprising to some that as a boy, Phelps said he feared the water and didn’t like getting his face wet. “But because I had someone to encourage me, who understood the importance of water safety, I developed a comfort level for the water,” Phelps said. “The more time I spent in the water, the stronger I became, and my passion for the sport grew.”

In 2014, the Michael Phelps Foundation gave away $425,146 in grants, according to its Form 990.  The foundation aims to level the playing field for youth and athletes in underserved communities.

Im-program

Named after Phelps’ signature event, the individual medley, the IM program is promoted in U.S. cities where access to swimming is limited.  The IM program offers water-safety courses, recreational pool activities, and swim training, as well as health and wellness education.  To emphasize the need for such programs, the Phelps Foundation website cites the statistic that youth drowning rates in ethnically-diverse communities are two to three times higher than the national average.

Since 2010, the IM program has reached over 15,000 youth through the Boys & Girls Club of America and Special Olympics. In 2014, the Michael Phelps Foundation delivered the IM program to 35 Boys & Girls Clubs nationwide. 

“The Michael Phelps Foundation is creating a more inclusive sport with expanded opportunities for youth and athletes of all backgrounds."

To help talented athletes in financial need, Phelps’ foundation partnered with the Level Field Fund to create a grant program for swimmers. The Michael Phelps Foundation wants to “fund talent and fuel dreams for the next generation of Olympic heroes.”

“Losing talented athletes because of a lack of financial means is troubling,” Phelps said. “We support the Level Field Fund because we are big believers that every athlete should have the chance to pursue their dreams to their full potential.”

Olympian Katie Meili is one of the talented athletes who received a Level Field Fund Swimming Grant – which pays for expenses such as travel, coaching, training and event fees.   She won a bronze medal in the 100m breaststroke in Rio.  Thanks to the swim grant, Alex Meyer successfully competed in a 21k open water race in Poland and brought home prize money that covered two months of his living expenses.

Phelps also leverages his celebrity to help local charities.  Through Caps for a Cause, Phelps provides signed swim caps so that nonprofit organizations can raise funds at their respective silent auctions and fundraisers. 

Future Plans

Boomer PhelpsThe Olympics is just the icing on the cake for Phelps.  Phelps and his fiancée, Nicole Johnson, welcomed their first child Boomer Robert Phelps earlier this year.  Phelps said he enjoys family life and regularly posts adorable Instagram photos.

The future continues to be golden for Phelps, who is expected to compete in additional swim events this week.  He also can’t seem to leave the pool, and he has hinted that he may continue competitive swimming after Rio.

Watching Phelps score his 21st gold medal – and counting! – this week, it’s clear we are watching history in the making.  And his engagement in philanthropy shows that in and out of the pool, Phelps is one to watch. 

We are rooting for more victories in Rio!  And we’re looking forward to witnessing how he channels his talent, determination, and passion for swimming into creating a more inclusive sport with expanded opportunities for youth and athletes of all backgrounds.

--Melissa Moy

2016 Olympic Games: What Rio Doesn’t Want the World to See
August 9, 2016

(Leticia Osorio is a program officer at Ford Foundation. This post first ran in Ford Foundation’s Equals Change blog.)

Leticia_osorio_0142cWith the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro under way, it is clear the Olympic legacy already falls short of its initial promises to the city.

 Rio is still dealing with inadequate and unfinished infrastructure projects and overinflated costs, on top of the economic and political instability facing Brazil. These unfilled promises mimic the disorganization and corruption from the 2014 World Cup in Rio.

Both games brought promises of meaningful transformations for Rio’s citizens, but instead ended up violating human rights, increasing public debt, and concentrating expensive infrastructure mostly in developed neighborhoods.

Six million people live in the city of Rio de Janeiro, and one in four of them are poor residents living in slums called favelas. In preparing for the World Cup and Olympics, the city government announced a comprehensive development plan that they called the social legacy plan. The favelas have long been starved of investment in public infrastructure, so the prospect of new developments and upgrades was exciting. Instead, the plan only further segregated poor residents.

In Providencia, Rio’s oldest slum, the main project was the construction of a $20 million cable car. While developers promised the cable car would connect residents to jobs, in reality 30 percent of residents were threatened with forced evictions to make way for the project. Not only was the community unaware of the project beforehand, but it also had no input in the draft planning or approval processes.

OLYMPIC PROTEST PHOTO

 The damaging effects of the Olympics on Rio’s poor residents

Widespread threats of forced removals of citizens from their neighborhoods for development projects related to major sporting events in Rio have been controversial. The Popular Committee on the World Cup and the Olympics— a civil society network comprising social movements, NGOs, research centers and universities— estimates that from 2009 to 2015, 22,059 families were forcibly uprooted from their homes for development projects related to these events.

 Agencia Publica, an investigative journalism outlet and a Ford Foundation grantee, told the stories of 100 evicted families, providing them a voice through one of the largest multimedia investigations related to the Olympics. According to Agencia Publica's co-director Natalia Viana, these firsthand stories provide “concrete evidence of serious human rights violations, of the right to housing, to freedom of movement, to information and even freedom of expression.”

Fifty days before the opening of the Olympics, the governor of Rio declared a state of financial emergency and asked for federal support to avoid a collapse in public security, health, education, transportation, and environmental management.

The cost of the Rio Olympics is estimated to be more than $10 billion and that does not include all of the tax exemptions, public loans, and fiscal incentives that have not been disclosed. The government gave special legal exemptions to developers, allowing them to circumvent planning and urban laws, restrict civil liberties, waive mandatory environmental analyses, ban local and informal businesses, and criminalize public protests.

“ More than 90 percent of the 900 families in the low-income community of Vila Autodromo were forcibly relocated to make way for the Olympic Park.”

The NGO Justiça Global, another Ford partner, produced a video series of four episodes telling how such measures are felt disproportionately by those who are already not well protected, such as those with insecure housing, informal jobs, or already suffering from marginalization and discrimination.

For example, more than 90 percent of the 900 families living in the low-income community of Vila Autodromo were forcibly relocated to make way for the Olympic Park, even though most of them held land concessions titles granted by the state. Although compensation and nearby alternative housing was offered, many families resisted leaving, prompting violent clashes with police. The residents felt they were excluded and disturbed by the games for the capital interests of wealthy developers.

In reaction to the negative impacts related to these infrastructure projects, Rio’s government has responded by blocking access to information and reducing transparency. The organization Article 19, another Ford grantee, put in 39 Freedom of Information requests on the impact of the construction of the Transolimpica bus rapid transit system on the lives of the families whose homes are in the way of the new bus system. But only one was fully answered. It was impossible to find out information on the final route of the bus system, although hundreds of families had already been forcibly displaced.

Additionally, more than 2,500 people killed by the police in Rio since 2009, as reported by Ford grantee Amnesty International. In the month of May alone, 40 people were killed by police officers on duty in the city and 84 across the state. The communities most affected by this violence are those living in slums located around the main access routes to and from the international airport and competition arenas.

Involving communities to ensure shared benefits

While cities agree to host major sporting events based on the premise that the resulting development and legacy will benefit everyone, wealthy developers are usually the ones that get all of the gains at the expense of residents, especially those who are poor and marginalized. So what is happening in Rio is not a new story.

What is new is that communities in Rio are starting to push back. A robust civil society network came together to monitor and collect information on development processes, expenditures, and rights violations. It helped residents speak out against harmful development plans and get compensation for those being displaced. The network submitted reports to international organizations, including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and various United Nations mechanisms. Communities became the defenders of their own rights, and they sought the assistance of powerful institutions like the Public Defender’s Office and the UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, leveraging alternative planning and national and international advocacy.

The alliances established between communities and relevant stakeholders were unfortunately not enough to reconfigure the existing power relationship between the city government and the residents. The laws that were passed to relax tender regulations and urbanistic controls did not ban forced evictions or set procedural safeguards, and there was no broad public debate over the nature of improvements needed.

Governments and public managers still need to learn how a city can stage world events successfully while also respecting the rights of the communities living in the path of infrastructure projects. Participatory development and stricter international regulation is a good place to start. Just like how government and business elites organize and lobby to host these games, we must help communities organize and defend their rights to ensure that they are truly benefitting from the development and investment associated with these games.

-- Leticia Osorio

Going for Gold: Olympic-Sized Philanthropy
August 8, 2016

Some Olympians, competing on the world stage for the first time, arrive untested and find themselves suddenly propelled to fame and fortune; others arrive already acknowledged as the best of the best. And while they all share a passion for succeeding, many share an equal passion for giving back and helping others. From building schools, to advocating for positive body images for girls, to supporting organ donations, Olympians are leaving their mark on the world of philanthropy.

Going for Gold

In celebration of the 2016 Rio Olympics, we've created "Going for Gold" a special Olympic preview, highlighting some of the world's foremost Olympic philanthropists.

Watch Going for Gold

About Transparency Talk

  • Transparency Talk, the Glasspockets blog, is a platform for candid and constructive conversation about foundation transparency and accountability. In this space, Foundation Center highlights strategies, findings, and best practices on the web and in foundations–illuminating the importance of having "glass pockets."

    The views expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foundation Center.

    Questions and comments may be
    directed to:

    Janet Camarena
    Director, Transparency Initiatives
    Foundation Center

    If you are interested in being a
    guest contributor, contact:
    glasspockets@foundationcenter.org

Subscribe to Transparency Talk

Categories