Tag Archives: FIdelity Charitable

Strange Math

Here’s the world’s simplest math problem.

My wife Pat and I often meet a pair of friends for a movie. If there’s a risk that the show will sell out, I run over to the theater ahead of time and buy all four tickets in advance. When our friends arrive, we hand them their tickets and they pay us back what they owe us.

So the question is this: how many tickets did the movie theater sell?

Four, of course.

But in the parallel universe of donor-advised funds (DAFs), where double-counting comes as naturally as breathing and dissembling, the answer would be six.

Let me try to explain the inexplicable. Continue reading

Share this: Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Wall Street 9, Charity 0

The news last week was stunning, but at the same time utterly unsurprising: When The Chronicle of Philanthropy compiled its annual Philanthropy 400 list of the nonprofit organizations that had raised the most money in the United States last year, the top dog was not United Way or the Salvation Army, but Fidelity Charitable.

The finding sparked a series of stories around the country: The New Yorker,  The Washington Post , The San Francisco Chronicle, The American Prospect, and National Public Radio, to name a few. Journalists are gob-smacked by the idea that an affiliate of a financial services firm could claim the title of top charity – and that it did so by the hefty margin of $900 million over United Way Worldwide. (Last year Fidelity’s take rose 20%; United Way’s dropped 4%.)

But those of you who have been reading my rants about the commercial donor-advised fund industry have seen this coming for five years. It’s like watching the sea levels rise from climate change. We’ve long known what was going to happen. Now, the evidence is incontrovertible. I take some grim satisfaction in the news, but mostly I feel despair. Continue reading

Share this: Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Fidelity Charitable Reveals Its Arrogance, But Not Its Salaries

[Note: This post was published in the December 1, 2015 on-line edition of  The Chronicle of Philanthropy.]

It’s common knowledge that transparency rules the day for disclosure of the salaries paid to nonprofit executives.

Tax-exempt organizations can’t hide their top compensation numbers: Salary and benefit information for the most-highly-compensated executives is only a few mouse clicks away, displayed for all to see in the 990 informational tax returns available from Guidestar and other sources. This disclosure reflects the Congressional requirement that in return for tax-exempt status, nonprofits must make their informational returns — including top salaries — available for public inspection.

But one salary you won’t find listed is that of Amy Danforth, chief executive of Fidelity Charitable. Continue reading

Share this: Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

No Transparency, No Clue

I live in New Hampshire, where presidential candidates more or less take up residence for the year before our primary. They’re all around us now. Trust me. Come December I will half expect to find N.J. Gov. Chris Christie shoveling snow from our front steps. (He’s very good with storms, they say.)

So yes, my neighbors and I are a bit jaded about seeing presidential candidates – but we also take our role as early voters seriously. I try to meet every candidate in my party, not to mention a few from the other side. And part of my research includes looking at each candidate’s charitable giving, a natural interest of mine. How much does each candidate donate, and to whom? I think it’s important to know. Charitable giving is a reflection of the candidate’s values. Continue reading

Share this: Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail