Leverage: How Philanthropies Use New Tools to Create Change

Context and Problem Statement

• In 2015, US philanthropy distributed nearly $375 billion (approx. 2% of GDP), yet funding remains dwarfed by the scale of problems facing the sector.
• Critical unmet needs include 9,500 diseases lacking cures, 20% of children living in poverty, and extinction rates thousands of times higher than historical norms.
• The panel argues that "business as usual" is insufficient; solving these systemic issues requires disrupting traditional operating models and leveraging new tools involving governments, private companies, and evolved investors.

Panelist Insights on Disruption and Strategy

Brian Sheff (Vista Equity Partners / Global Wildlife Conservation)

• Leverage in Conservation: Investment in environmental preservation yields an estimated 110x return in tangible services (clean water, air, food, soil preservation).
• Operational Model: GWC recruits top scientists from other NGOs to work full-time on science, removing the requirement for fundraising and allowing focus on pure research and mitigation.
• Strategic Focus: Adopts a "sniper shot" approach, selecting specific locales (e.g., Suriname) where scientific credibility, government alignment, and local community needs intersect for maximum impact.
• Metrics: Success is defined by scientific milestones and local/indigenous buy-in rather than the construction of physical infrastructure or office expansion.

Todd Wagner (Charity Network)

• Digital Efficiency: Traditional analog fundraising (e.g., 300-person galas) is inefficient; digital platforms like Charity Buzz can reach 200,000+ bidders globally for the same items.
• Platform Strategy: Charity Network aims to build digital infrastructure for nonprofits to access younger demographics (Millennials) via micro-donations ($10–$50), moving them beyond traditional high-net-worth channels.
• Industry Critique: The nonprofit sector is overcrowded; the speaker argues there is no need for 100 breast cancer charities when five could suffice.
• Metric Reform: Criticizes the "overhead ratio" (program expense %) as a trivial metric that hinders efficiency, noting that for-profit markets rely on revenue and outcome metrics instead.
• Talent & Culture: Charitable giving must be integrated into corporate culture as a "front table" priority rather than an afterthought or "kiddie table" activity.
• Future Outlook: Cites Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg as catalysts for changing the philanthropic mindset; notes that Millennials prioritize organizational purpose and impact over brand recognition.

Marlo Gottfert-Longstreet (Tanner Project Foundation)

• Mission Driver: Foundation created in response to a family genetic crisis (mutant p53 gene); focuses on preventing cancer in her daughter (90% risk) and educating the public on genetic risk.
• Collaborative Model: Relies on open sharing of research and stories with entities like the J. Craig Venter Institute to accelerate early detection (Stage 0).
• Accessibility: Highlights the democratization of genomics, noting affordable home-testing kits (e.g., $249 for 30 genes) allow individuals to assess cancer risks without immediate medical intervention.
• Core Philosophy: "Knowledge is power"; emphasizes that knowing one's genetic history empowers future generations to make informed reproductive and health choices.

Tom Meredith (The Nature Conservancy / Waller Creek Conservancy)

• Compensation Crisis: Nonprofit executive salaries are artificially suppressed, forcing top talent (often MBA graduates earning $400k+) into the private sector; argues paying $200k for top-tier leadership is necessary to solve "wicked problems."
• Consolidation: Suggests consolidating the 1.5 million US nonprofits (with 600k under $1M revenue) to reduce bureaucracy and allow for higher, more effective staffing levels.
• Fact-Based Decision Making: Nature Conservancy employs 600 scientists out of 3,500 employees; advocates for quantifying nature's value through academic collaboration (e.g., Stanford, Minnesota) to create measurable ROI for donors.
• Storytelling: Emphasizes that effective advocacy must start with the "Why" before the "How" and "What" to generate emotional connection and leverage.
• Policy Impact: Highlights the efficacy of bipartisan policy (e.g., Bush administration's AIDS initiative, China's ivory ban) in addressing supply and demand for endangered species.

Strategic Recommendations and Consensus

• Metric Overhaul: Organizations must shift from measuring "cost" to measuring "outcomes" and "impact" to justify higher compensation and capital allocation.
• Corporate Principles: Nonprofits should adopt for-profit best practices, including codified strategies, KPIs, and "change management" to prevent mission creep and bureaucratic bloat.
• Talent Strategy: High-performing staff must be paid market-competitive salaries to attract top-tier human capital; feasibility studies should be replaced with bold, outcome-driven execution.
• Technology Adoption: Software and data should drive workflow and best practices, not just serve as fundraising tools; the next decade will see accelerated disruption via AI, VR, and AR.
• Advocacy Stance: The panel generally opposes the repeal of the Johnson Amendment, arguing it risks diluting nonprofit credibility and mission focus through partisan entanglement.

Forward-Looking Statements

• Technology will evolve faster in the next 10 years than in the previous 50, fundamentally altering philanthropic tools and conversations.
• The industry must move toward "subject matter experts" who provide objective analysis of nonprofit efficacy, similar to financial equity markets.
• There is a growing expectation that philanthropy will be integrated into the core business strategy of companies rather than treated as post-profit altruism.
• Future success depends on the willingness of boards and donors to accept "unreasonable" risks and challenge established conventions to solve complex systems problems.