Philanthropy Has a Trust Problem. Or Does It…
A new study from Independent Sector caught my attention for a reason I did not expect. Americans continue to express relatively strong trust in nonprofit organizations, with 56 percent saying they trust nonprofits to do what is right. That number is essentially unchanged from the prior year. Yet trust in “philanthropy” is dramatically lower, at only 29 percent. That 27-point gap is fascinating because nonprofits and philanthropy are so closely connected. In our field, we often use the two words almost interchangeably. The public clearly does not.
The obvious question is why. When people hear the word nonprofit, they may picture something familiar and tangible. They think about a local food bank, hospital foundation, university, animal shelter, church related organization, arts organization or youth program. They may know someone who works there. They may have volunteered there, donated there or benefited from its services. There is a direct connection between the organization and something they can see. The Independent Sector study supports this idea, finding that direct interaction with nonprofits tends to increase trust.
The word philanthropy creates a different image. In the research, questions about philanthropy focused on corporate foundations, private foundations and high net worth individuals engaged in philanthropic activity. That definition alone may explain part of the trust gap. For many people, philanthropy may now suggest wealthy individuals, large foundations and corporations deciding where significant amounts of money should go. It can feel distant from everyday life and more closely associated with wealth, influence and power.
That creates an interesting question for those of us who work in this profession. Is philanthropy actually less trusted, or is the word itself misunderstood?
Philanthropy is much broader than large foundations and wealthy donors. The person who gives $50 to a local nonprofit is participating in philanthropy. So is the former patient who supports a hospital every year. So is the family that establishes a scholarship, the donor who leaves a charitable gift in an estate plan and the volunteer who eventually decides to make a financial commitment to an organization that has become meaningful to them. These acts may not be what many Americans picture when they hear the word “philanthropy,” even though they are fundamental expressions of it.
That may mean we have a language issue within our own profession. We use philanthropy as a positive and expansive term. The public may increasingly hear it as something institutional, elite or removed from ordinary generosity. If that is true, the trust numbers are telling us something different than the headline suggests.
People may still strongly believe in generosity. They may still trust organizations doing visible work in their communities. They may still want to support causes that matter to them. What they may distrust is what they believe the word philanthropy represents.
For nonprofit leaders and fundraisers, that distinction deserves attention. Language shapes how people understand our work. If the public connects nonprofit organizations with service and impact but connects philanthropy with wealth and influence, we should be careful about assuming those words carry the same meaning outside our profession that they carry inside it.
The study raises a question worth continuing to explore: Does philanthropy truly have a trust problem, or does the word philanthropy have a meaning problem?
I suspect the answer may be some of both.
