When philanthropic needs surround us, how can we avoid being overwhelmed?

Seth Godin raises this question in a post where he develops a theme from the secular preference utilitarian ethicist Peter Singer:

Singer is famous for posing a stunningly difficult question, paraphrased as, “If you are walking by a pond and you see a child drowning, do you save her? What if it means ruining a very fancy pair of Italian shoes?” Okay, if we assume the answer is yes, then Read the rest of this entry »

Shankar Vedantam tells a disturbing story about a dog at sea to raise a serious question about how we humans prioritize our charitable endeavors.

A fire broke out in the engine room of the Insiko 1907, an unregistered tanker, as it passed about 800 miles south of the Hawaiian Islands. The fire swept through the ship so quickly that the crew wasn’t even able to radio for help.

When the fire subsided, 11 men and the captain’s dog found themselves safe, with good supplies of food and water, in the ship’s forward quarters. But they had no engines, no radio, and no means for contacting the outside world.

So the ship drifted aimlessly for days, eventually coming within 220 miles of Hawaii–at which point a cruise ship picked up the crew. Hokget, the dog, however, was left behind.

One of the cruise ship passengers who heard Hokget barking called the Hawaiian Humane Society to see if they would do something to rescue him. The Society alerted fishing boats, but the operation seemed hopeless.

As Vedantam explains,

The problem . . . was that no one knew where the Insiko was. The U.S. Coast Guard estimated it could be anywhere in an area measuring 360,000 square miles.

I don’t need to tell the whole story. A month and a half after the fire broke out, and over $300,000 of private and public taxpayer money later, Hokget was finally rescued.

In the meantime, letters and contributions had poured into the Humane Society from 39 states and four foreign countries. One was a check for $5,000. The notes expressed deep anguish and concern:

“This check is in memory of the little dog lost at sea.”

“Thank you for pulling my heartstrings and for reminding me of all the hope there is left in this world.”

And so forth.

This episode raises a series of disturbing questions, however, writes Vedantam. Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve posted the story of a major bequest that came to the brink of becoming worthless–or worse than worthless–to the recipients.

I imagine it’s a cautionary tale that many of us should pay attention to.

Check it out on the Strategic Inheritance forums . . . and join the conversation!

I described the technical differences between donor-advised funds (DAFs) and private foundations back in June of 2007. Frankly, at the time, I saw no compelling reason seriously to consider creating a DAF.

Following the FoundationWise^SM conference, however, I’m seeing more reasons than I did back then to consider this alternative. Read the rest of this entry »

I mentioned I was able to participate in a meeting with about a dozen fairly high-end charitable givers. Our host at the meeting told us about a giving strategy that he and his family have begun pursuing in the last few years, a strategy that can “pay back” in tax deductions as much as or even more than whatever you gave.

I thought it was well worth mentioning this strategy just in case you find yourself in a position to make donations of, say, a hundred thousand dollars or more and you’re not yet at the point where you are giving 50% of your AGI (Adjusted Gross Income) to charity.

This strategy could multiply your ability to give. Read the rest of this entry »

I read an article this morning that reminded me: Most estate- and legacy-planning professionals ignore philanthropic considerations in their basic planning strategies.

Alexis Martin Neely, for example, notes, in an article printed in the latest Bottom Line Personal, that single adult parents (widowed or divorced, in particular) need to make allowances in their estate plans not only for their personal health care, but also “for the guardianship of any minor children and transfers [of] assets to heirs of your choice while minimizing taxes.”

It struck me: This is the standard mantra of traditional estate planning professionals. For them, estate planning is all about minimizing taxes and maximizing flow-through to the next generation. And it has absolutely nothing to do with larger life purposes, the legacies Read the rest of this entry »

I mentioned that profits have to do with increased wealth; and increased wealth is not the same as cash. If we fail to understand those differences, we can run into some serious trouble.

I thought I would illustrate what I am talking about. Read the rest of this entry »

Last August I wrote a brief outline of what one might want to include in a Gifting Criteria Statement.

As I was picking through a pile of papers on my desk on Saturday, I came across the actual document our family has at the moment. I thought you might find it interesting and, possibly, useful–at least as a discussion-starting model for your family’s statement: Read the rest of this entry »