Author: Bruce, Ellen; Moe, Judie; Saasta, Timothy P.; Abernathy, James W. Jr.; and Bothwell, Robert O.

Publication Year: 1979

Media Type: Report

Summary:

Preliminary findings from a study of the public information accountability of the country's largest foundations. This study examines the written information that the country's largest foundations voluntarily make available to the public. For three primary reasons it focuses on foundations' efforts to inform the public.

Abstract:

Preliminary findings from a study of the public information accountability of the country's largest foundations. This study examines the written information that the country's largest foundations voluntarily make available to the public. For three primary reasons it focuses on foundations' efforts to inform the public. First, information is essential for the public to evaluate foundation performance, to influence foundation priorities, and to insure against foundation abuses. Second, information is critical to help insure that all grant-seekers have access to foundation funds. And third, the information a foundation n provides to the public is a basic measure of its accountability to the public.

A total of 208 foundations are included in the study; the 150 largest grant-making foundations, the 30 largest community foundations and the 28 largest corporate foundations. To gather information from these foundations, the researchers made as many as six written and phone requests. The overall response rate was 75 percent, which is very high for studies on foundations. The study used a rating form which focused on 22 key items of information in five categories:

1. Grant making interests and policies (e.g. statement of program/funding priorities)
2. Grant proposal application and evaluation procedures
3. Recent grants data (e.g. names and locations of grantees)
4. Governance information (e.g. list of board of directors/trustees)
5. Finances (e.g. simple information about income, expenses, and liabilities)

Major findings:

• Almost 60% of the country's largest foundations do not meet an acceptable standard for providing information to the public, and half of these foundations refuse to provide any information to the public when requested.
• Of the other 40% of the 208 foundations studied, most provide an acceptable quality of information, while a few (4% of the 208) score excellent.
• The most neglected category is financial information. Half of the corporate foundations and almost half of the private foundations score zero in this area.
• The next most neglected category involves information about recent grants made by foundations, the most important information for grant-seekers. Only 35 percent of the foundations attain an acceptable or higher score in this area.
• The type of foundation which most consistently provides essential information is the community foundation (a median score of 54.5 out of a possible 99), followed by private foundations (49.5) and corporate foundations (30.5). Private foundations dominate the extremes; not only are they the only type of foundation to score excellent, but a greater proportion of them also score zero.

CONTENTS
1. Summary.

2. Introduction.

3. Background: 
         A. Why foundations should be accountable.
         B. Present Federal Government requirements for foundation accountability.
         C. The inadequacy of the present requirements for the public information
              accountability of foundations.

4. The study:
         A. Why this study was undertaken.
         B. What this study is about. 
         C. Criteria used in assessing published materials.
         D. Study methodology.
         E. Results of the study.

5. Recommendations.

Reference notes.
Tables.
Appendices A, B, C.

Arts & Intersections:

Categories: Private Sector