The Practice of Place in Philanthropy: Grantmaking by Private Foundations in Canada and Australia

Effective models of place-based funding remain conceptually unresolved. Place-based, collective impact initiatives are increasingly recognised for creating long-term systems change, yet the role of philanthropy, specifically private foundations, in supporting, advocating for and catalysing change is underexplored (Husted et al., 2021). This paper provides insights into the internal factors influencing a private foundation’s approach to place-based work.<br/><br/>Interest in place as an animating concept is beginning to permeate research in philanthropy (Hopkins & Ferris, 2015; Never & Westberg, 2016; Pill, 2017; Williamson et al., 2021). However, we know little about place-based grantmaking by private foundations, which unlike community foundations are not inherently rooted in place. Where, and at what scale, do private foundations focus their grantmaking? With what purposes and what effects? The concept of being place-based as an effective model of grantmaking needs to be more fully analyzed, conceptually and empirically.<br/>This paper draws on the expanding literature on place-based analysis to conceptualize and assess grantmaking practices of private foundations, comparing Canada and Australia. We first describe a three-part typology of the concept of being ‘place-based,’ in contrast to being cause-oriented. 1) ‘Proximate’ involves support for organizations and causes familiar to private foundations by mere geography – giving where they live, without a strategy for social or systems change (Glückler & Ries, 2012). 2) A more intentional ‘strategy-based’ approach necessitates greater engagement and commitment over time, and involves selecting locales to benefit from foundation support. These may be close to foundation offices or more distant communities, . 3) A ‘systems-change x place’ approach entails investing in deeper knowledge about community and place, collaboration and committing for a longer term. We then ask: do private foundations concentrate on one, or a mix, of these place-based grantmaking approaches ? Is there an underlying strategy, and what are the implications for foundations and grantees?<br/><br/>Two key factors are hypothesized to explain more place-engaged strategic and systems change approaches: foundation leadership, and idea transfer and learning. Specifically, we argue that when boards and senior managers include younger and more diverse leaders, foundations are more likely to move beyond the proximate. We also anticipate a contagion or transfer effect whereby foundations emulate effective place-based models of peer foundations. Our empirical analysis examines grantmaking by 25 private foundations in each of Canada and Australia over the past decade. For Canada, data on the locations of grants are geocoded from annual charitable tax returns, which include the amount and recipient of every gift. For Australia, data are compiled from multiple public and organizational records. Content analysis of foundations’ and grantees’ websites and annual/evaluation reports is then used to assess the purpose and underlying strategy of these grants, and compare practices to the typology.<br/><br/>By delineating and comparing place-based grantmaking practices of private foundations in Canada and Australia, we provide empirical evidence of communities and funders working collectively to tackle entrenched and complex problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.