What this is
Giving structured for impact and for scrutiny. Family philanthropy attracts examination, and a programme that cannot withstand it becomes a liability.
What you get
Where it sits
Multi generational reputation, handled with the discretion it requires.
Frequently asked
A question for your advisers. Communications-wise, consistency matters more than quantum.
Substantive programmes benefit from disclosure. Token giving publicised loudly attracts the comparison you would rather avoid.
Not on its own, and attempting it transparently as a response to criticism usually compounds the problem.
Reactive giving across many causes produces no evidenced outcome and invites the criticism that the foundation is decorative. A defined focus with a theory of change is defensible.
Family foundations attract scrutiny of trustees, grant processes and related-party transactions. Structure it as if it will be audited, because eventually it may be.
Deciding what success looks like before granting is what makes later reporting credible rather than anecdotal.
Also in Family Office & Legacy
Start here