In the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, grantmakers are now being asked for a substantially higher level of due diligence regarding grantees than ever before. The good news is that providers of computer-based products and services are being responsive and beginning to offer grantmakers some practical and cost-effective solutions.
The Council on Foundations defines a family foundation as one whose funds are derived from members of a single family, though this is not a legal term and has no precise definition. The Council on Foundations suggests that family foundations have at least one family member serving as an officer or board member of the foundation and, as the donor, that individual (or a relative) must play a significant role in governing and/or managing the foundation. Most family foundations are run by family members who serve as trustees or directors on a voluntary basis. In many cases, second- and third-generation descendants of the original donors manage the foundation.
Family foundations make up over half of all private (family, corporate, independent, and operating) foundations, or 40,456 out of approximately 73,764 foundations (Foundation Center, 2011). Family foundations make up approximately one-third of the Council’s membership.
Family foundations range in asset size from a few hundred thousand dollars to more than $1 billion. The holdings of family foundations total approximately $294 billion, or about 44 percent of all foundation holdings of $662 billion. Despite this, three out of five family foundations hold assets of less than $1 million. Family foundations gave away approximately $21.3 billion in grants in 2011 (The Foundation Center, 2011).
Below is everything on our site for family foundations. You can use the filtering options on the right to narrow these results.
Prepared by the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, this report provides a summary of the legal constraints in global grantmaking and draws on illustrative examples from the U.S., Europe, and other regions. It also outlines potential options to address these barriers.
This toolkit is designed for private foundations that want to educate and encourage their grantees about getting involved in civic and policy activities to increase organizational capacity and impact. While its primary focus is on the grantmaking activity of foundations, the toolkit also addresses rules and guidance for policy involvement by foundation officials acting on behalf of their foundations.
Sample conflict of interest policies for staff and board members.
Sample conflict of interest policies from the Community Foundation of Switzerland County and Triangle Community Foundation.
For boards of directors, trustees and foundation managers, there are few areas of operation that cause more confusion and uncertainty than indemnification and the purchase of directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance. And it is no wonder. Mixing the often impenetrable statutory language of the Internal Revenue Code with the highly refined wording of insurance policies creates fertile ground for confusion. To make matters worse, the rules are not static. State laws change, Treasury regulations are revised and insurance policy language is frequently amended.
Accepting and using tickets and other tangible benefits of more than minimal value raises questions for foundation managers. Here's what the general Tax Code rules say is acceptable.
This Document Retention and Destruction Policy of the Council on Foundations (the "Council") identifies the record retention responsibilities of staff, volunteers, members of the Board of Directors, and outsiders for maintaining and documenting the storage and destruction of the Council’s documents and records. You can use this as guide for your own policy.
The Internal Revenue Code provides excise tax penalties that can be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service whenever unreasonable or excessive compensation is paid to high-level employees of charitable organizations.
The Council receives numerous inquiries each year about the amount of compensation paid to directors or trustees (members of the governing board) of foundations. Since 1969, board members of private foundations have been subject to excise tax penalties for receiving unreasonable compensation. In 1996, Congress passed the “intermediate sanction” rules that enable the Internal Revenue Service to apply similar penalties for excessive compensation paid by public charities.