RGK Faculty - Francie Ostrower

There is no magic bullet for arts organizations looking to build their audiences while also increasing revenue. While it’s possible to engage both new and current audiences using a variety of strategies, successful audience building may not always happen on the organization’s desired terms. It also might not bring the hoped-for financial gains, at least not right away.

That’s one of several key learnings from the nonprofit performing arts organizations who participated in Wallace’s Building Arts for Sustainability (BAS) initiative from 2015 to 2019. The 25 organizations tested different approaches to build new audiences while keeping their current audiences engaged. Some focused on age groups, such as millennials or Gen-X; others looked at location and how they interacted with their community. Some worked to attract a more racially or ethnically diverse audience. A few sought to build audiences for new or less familiar works.

Among the 25 arts organizations participating in Wallace’s Building Audiences for Sustainability initiative, the most frequently chosen demographic target group for audience-building efforts was “millennials.” But as the organizations began to create new programs and marketing strategies geared toward bringing these younger patrons in the door, they almost universally found themselves grappling with a group that was more complex and multifaceted than they’d originally thought.

Are foundations with set periods for spending down their assets more effective as grantmakers than their peers who are established to exist in perpetuity? This is a longstanding discussion among philanthropists, with an article on the topic by Ray Madoff and Rob Reich published just yesterday in the Chronicle of Philanthropy. But Dr. Francie Ostrower, who has done extensive and in-depth research into this aspect of foundations, has some answers that may surprise readers.

Two reports on foundation “sunsetting” by the RGK Center’s Francie Ostrower are available from the Aspen Institute. The reports, which provide important lessons and a guide to decision-making for foundations that “sunset” or “spend down” and close rather than continue in perpetuity, were released by the Aspen Institute’s Program on Philanthropy and Social Innovation. The reports are based on a research study conducted by Dr. Ostrower with a grant awarded by the Aspen Institute.

Sunsetting: A Framework for Foundation Life as Well as Death uses detailed case studies to understand why and how foundations decide to terminate. By discussing the common themes, challenges, and opportunities associated with sunsetting, the report shows how limiting a foundation’s life can be a strategy for innovative and effective philanthropy.

Foundation Sunset: A Decision-Making Guide is a practical companion piece drawing on the case studies that shows how donors and trustees can use sunsetting as a philanthropic strategy consistent with their values, circumstances, and motivations. The report serves as a useful guide to help donors and trustees design a blueprint for shutting down.

Through a series of candid personal interviews with nearly one hundred donors, Why the Wealthy Give offers an in-depth look at the world of elite philanthropy. Francie Ostrower focuses on the New York City area, with its high concentration of affluent donors, to explore both the motivations of individual donors and the significance of philanthropy for the culture and organization of elite groups. In so doing, she offers an account of why the wealthy give that also provides insight into the nature of elite culture, status, identity, and cohesion. Emphasizing the diversity of philanthropy, the book also shows how and why different types of donors support different causes. It further demonstrates how, in the face of considerable change, elite philanthropy has adapted and therefore endured. A timely discussion explores the ways in which elite donors view the respective roles of government and philanthropy. Why the Wealthy Give shows that elite philanthropy involves far more than writing a check. The wealthy take philanthropy and adapt it into an entire way of life that serves as a vehicle for the social and cultural life of their class. This is reflected in the widespread popularity of educational and cultural causes among donors. At the same time, Ostrower finds divergent patterns of giving that reflect alternative sources of donor identity, such as religion, ethnicity, and gender, and explains why certain kinds of donors are more or less likely to diverge from the prestige hierarchy of their class in their philanthropy.