NEW YORK (AP) — A Seattle-based charitable organization is committing to donate at least $500 million over the coming decade, effectively doubling what it gives each year as foundation leaders work to encourage more urgent charitable giving across the philanthropy world — particularly given what they describe as the sector’s “suffering” under President Donald Trump’s policies.
Federal funding reductions from the White House, attacks on civil society organizations and the elimination of diversity programs have created what the National Council of Nonprofits describes as an “existential crisis.” However, many nonprofit leaders believe philanthropic organizations’ responses have been inadequate. Some question where the emergency funding initiatives are, similar to those launched during the coronavirus pandemic when nonprofits faced severe challenges.
The majority of private charitable foundations distribute approximately 5% of their assets each year, which represents the minimum threshold mandated by the Internal Revenue Service. Ongoing discussions debate whether this contribution requirement should be raised. The prevailing philanthropic thinking suggests that going beyond this level could jeopardize foundations’ long-term sustainability.
The Marguerite Casey Foundation substantially boosted its donations in 2025, taking the unusual approach of tapping into its endowment to distribute $130 million. This experience validated what Carmen Rojas, its president and CEO, had long believed: Her responsibility to maintain the foundation’s permanence doesn’t conflict with her duty to properly fund the communities they serve.
“A very practical lesson is that we could give out more money and exist for a long time,” she told The Associated Press.
The Seattle-based foundation, established in 2001 using money from United Parcel Service founder Jim Casey, operates with a distinctive approach. Through invitation-only grants, they fund one-fourth of their recipients’ operating budgets across five-year periods.
Their funding targets “community-based organizations” that work to ensure “government works for everybody,” according to Rojas. This encompasses groups addressing economic welfare issues like housing and employment quality, as well as media organizations including the advocacy journalism nonprofit More Perfect Union and the National Trust for Local News.
A separate funding stream supports municipal and state-level initiatives designed to make government more responsive to community needs. The foundation recently provided $3 million to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s private fund supporting his universal free child care initiative.
Rojas anticipates providing similar unsolicited assistance to current grant recipients and indicated they will probably identify additional beneficiaries as their distribution increases. The new yearly minimum of $50 million represents twice the previous decade’s average, the foundation reports. Public tax documents reveal the foundation distributed between $23 million and $57 million each year from 2019 onward.
This represents part of Rojas’ push for a more “offensive” philanthropic strategy. She noted that the charitable sector frequently adopts a “defensive posture” focused on responding to challenges. Contributions — like their backing of NYC’s Mayor’s Fund — aim to demonstrate to the public “our government can be delivering more for you.”
“We have to be able to deliver for people, in meaningful ways, the things that they need to live a good life,” Rojas said.
Foundation leadership is also making a broader statement.
Many charitable organizations choose not to donate beyond the legally mandated 5% minimum, treating it as a maximum rather than a starting point. Board members, acting on their obligations to ensure perpetual organizational existence for charitable purposes, resist drawing from endowments.
Activist Abigail Disney and other philanthropists have recently advocated for raising the legally mandated minimum by approximately one percentage point. They contend that foundations aren’t simply financial institutions but tax-exempt social welfare organizations with mission-driven obligations — which some argue aren’t fulfilled by current philanthropic practices.
The Marguerite Casey Foundation aims to serve as a demonstration model. Their endowment began around $870 million last year, according to Daniel Gould, its vice president of investments and operations. Within twelve months, he reported, they had recovered the endowment funds used for last year’s expanded grantmaking. As of April 2026, he noted, the endowment value reached approximately $825 million.
During years with robust financial markets — which Gould defines as achieving at least 10% investment returns, the historical U.S. stock market average — they plan to distribute even larger amounts.
“Endowments are resilient,” Gould said. “That resilience should be translated into increased grantmaking.”
They’ve maintained this stability while simultaneously modifying their investment approach. More than half their endowment is overseen by managers from underrepresented racial communities, Gould reported. They’ve also withdrawn investments from private prisons, predatory lending institutions, weapons manufacturers, data center developers and other companies they consider harmful to the communities their nonprofit recipients serve.
According to Rojas, philanthropic organizations should leverage their complete resource capacity to further their missions.
“If it is our job to be charitable organizations, then we should act charitably, right?” she said, adding that “either we are charitable organizations, or we are investment firms that do 5% charity work.”
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation similarly provided rapid response funding last year as the Trump administration reduced federal research support. In North Carolina, the Kate B. Reynolds Charitable Trust distributed approximately $10 million above their typical amount.
The MacArthur Foundation announced in 2025 its commitment to boost giving for two years, also referencing the “crisis” resulting from the Trump administration’s policies. President John Palfrey stated that last year’s reductions are producing their most severe impacts currently. The foundation intends to maintain its elevated spending level — which reached around 7% last year, or $190 million beyond projections.
Nevertheless, a February survey involving 380 nonprofits revealed that most participants find securing foundation grants increasingly difficult. The Trump administration’s termination of federal grant programs has left nonprofits competing for limited funding from a reduced pool. Simultaneously, many nonprofits are experiencing increased service demand following comprehensive changes to Medicaid and food assistance programs.
Some funders are proceeding more carefully following the White House’s campaign against “left-wing terrorism,” threats to remove universities’ tax-exempt status and efforts to place staff at a criminal justice nonprofit that received congressionally appropriated funds.
Describing nonprofits as “under attack” isn’t exaggerated, according to Center for Effective Philanthropy President Phil Buchanan, whose organization conducted the “State of Nonprofits 2026” report. Enhanced spending represents a “perfectly reasonable” response during times of significant need, he emphasized, noting that adequate resources exist. U.S. foundation assets have more than doubled during the past twenty-five years when adjusted for inflation, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis data shows.
“You can’t step up for everybody,” Buchanan said. “But figure out who you can step up for.”
Palfrey views recent federal actions as attacks on “the freedom to give.” He references the Department of Justice indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights nonprofit whose extremist group monitoring work has triggered a Republican-led congressional investigation into fraud allegations. Major investment companies removed SPLC from their charitable account donation lists.
This precedent could financially destroy “good” nonprofits with just the “mere whiff of an investigation,” Palfrey warned.
“These are powerful and negative chilling effects on the charitable nonprofit sector,” the MacArthur Foundation president told AP in May. “And they are ones that we ought to resist with every fiber of our being.”
