When I ask people about their legacy, their activities with charitable and non-profit organizations figure large. The vast majority of us donate our money and many of us volunteer our time, and we have seen the difference one person can make.1 Terry Fox is an example of legacy at its finest. Most of us have seen an image of this extraordinary young man as he struggled to complete his cross-Canada run in 1980 to raise money and awareness for cancer research. He was twenty-two years old and running on an artificial limb attached to the stump of his right leg. He had lost the leg to cancer when he was eighteen. He called his run the Marathon of Hope. He managed to make it more than halfway across Canada before the cancer spread from his legs to his lung, and he had to return home for more treatment. He died ten months later. Fox may have lost his battle with cancer, but his achievements exceeded even his soaring ambition. He had asked every Canadian to donate one dollar to his cause in order to raise $22 million, which at the time seemed like an impossible dream for this unknown young man with a tiny support team. By the thirty-fifth anniversary of his run, the foundation in his name had raised $700 million.
Fox received countless awards that cemented his legacy—he was the youngest Companion of the Order of Canada, his portrait hangs in Canada’s Sports Hall of Fame, and a mountain was named after him in his home province of British Columbia. But these towering achievements have been overshadowed by his most impactful legacy: the millions who have taken up his mantle to support his cause. Every year, in over nine thousand communities across Canada, and in some sixty countries around the world, hundreds of thousands of people participate in Terry Fox runs to keep his dream alive. And then there are the countless others who have been inspired by his example to start initiatives for their own cause.
Terry Fox’s quest was infused with his passion and this is one of the reasons he touches our hearts. While undergoing chemotherapy, he was overcome by the pain and despair that surrounded him in the treatment rooms, and he became determined to take himself to the limit to try and help alleviate the suffering. “Somewhere the hurting must stop,” he wrote in his letter requesting support for his run. “We need your help. The people in cancer clinics all over the world need people who believe in miracles.”2
When we think we can’t make a difference to the world because of our financial or personal limitations, it behooves us to consider Terry Fox. His accomplishment in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds challenges us and our rationalizations. Fox maintained that he was not special. “I just wish people would realize that anything’s possible, if you try; dreams are made, if people try.”3 Although Fox’s achievements may be beyond us, his strategy of asking each of us to donate one dollar reminds us that we all have the capacity to make a contribution. His legacy is a testament to the power of giving what we can.
Tracy Gary is a non-profit entrepreneur and legacy adviser who wrote Inspired Philanthropy to improve people’s lifetime giving. Gary is clear that philanthropy is not just for the wealthy. The word, derived from the Greek, means “love of humankind,” and Gary describes philanthropy as giving time, talent or treasure for the public good. She insists that those who donate twenty-five dollars to a nursery school raffle have earned the right to call themselves philanthropists.
Gary says that it was considering her will and the bequest she would be making that got her thinking about her current giving. “Then I thought, if I’m planning my giving for when I’m dead,” she writes, “what’s stopping me from doing it now? That’s when I decided to use my will as a blueprint for a yearly giving plan.”4 She argues that everyone benefits if we integrate our values, passions, and dreams for our communities and families into our giving. Gary suggests we think about both our immediate and our lifetime giving and estimate how much we want to contribute now and in the future.
Dorothy is a good example of someone who is following Gary’s approach. She has always been generous with her time and money, but now that she’s turned seventy, she’s had a transformative shift in her thinking. “I’m deliberately looking for ways my money can have a real impact,” she says. “As an example, I’ve gotten to know a recent immigrant and I’ve given him some money so his children can go to university. I recently said yes to a request from him for money so his wife could set up a stall in the market. I’ve decided that money means more to him than to me. So that’s my consideration now—what the money means to somebody else versus what it means to me.” Dorothy’s thinking is also having an impact on her will. “I’ve changed my will to allocate 10 percent to philanthropic causes,” she says, “and I’ve told my children. I also want to leave money for my nephews for their education.”
“My attitude toward money has changed,” she says, “and I’m not sure why. I think it doesn’t mean so much to me now because I’m so happy with my life. I know I need to take care of my long-term needs, and they may be long indeed—my mother died when she was nearly one hundred. But I’ve decided I have enough money. So, my priorities have changed and I’m giving away more to worthy causes, and I’m giving money toward my grandchildren’s education.” Building a legacy of family memories is also part of Dorothy’s thinking. “I’m spending money to travel with my children and grandchildren,” she says, “and I’ve started taking my grandchildren on trips just by themselves. I took the whole family on a vacation this year. We piled in a van and went on a road trip. These are experiences that will burn bright in their memories.”
My friend Eric is leaving a legacy by donating hours of volunteer time and expertise to an organization dedicated to alleviating the local housing crisis. Over decades of work with the non-profit, he has had the satisfaction of watching access to affordable housing transform the lives of many families. The organization has acknowledged his dedication by naming a building after him. Eric says he is honoured to have the recognition, but what pleases him more are the dozens of affordable homes now available in his community. The high-profile recognition that Eric has been given is an example of the ways that organizations are rewarding and acknowledging the importance of their volunteers. Increasingly, walls that list financial donors ranked by donation level now include volunteers listed by number of hours contributed.
I heard about a woman who has a dedicated approach to giving when I interviewed Nancy. Nancy spoke admiringly about a colleague who has formed a lifelong attachment to her chosen organization. “This woman has made a commitment to a particular organization dedicated to animal welfare,” Nancy says. “I have been very impressed with the way she integrates her charitable giving into her life goals. She chooses to only work part-time because she doesn’t want to spend any more of her day in the office. She has reduced her financial needs to meet that level of income, and her very tight budget always includes a contribution to her charity.” Nancy learned this when she asked her colleague to make a Christmas donation to a worthy cause. The colleague explained that her charitable donation was already allocated. “Nothing would interfere with that commitment,” Nancy says.
How Do I Choose My Legacy Cause?
Many of us aren’t deeply committed to one cause, like my friend Eric’s dedication to affordable housing or Nancy’s friend’s unwavering support for animal welfare. Even if we make regular charitable donations, we may do so without an overall strategy and are more likely to react to requests for help that randomly come our way. Maybe a friend is running a marathon for a worthy cause and asks for our support, or there’s an annual campaign at work and our colleagues want to win the fundraising competition, or someone reaches out to us on social media and asks us to respond to an international crisis. A recent survey found that six in ten of us wait to be solicited by a charity before donating. It’s the minority that is proactively pursuing information about a charitable cause.5 That may change if we’re thinking about our legacy.
John is someone who has always made a significant contribution to his community, and he now wants to leave a charitable bequest in his will. “I’m wondering whether I should make a big statement by leaving everything to one group,” he says, “or leave smaller amounts to a larger number of organizations. I’m particularly interested in the area of children’s mental health, and I want to contribute to an organization that measures its results. I’m looking for some place where I can achieve an outcome, rather than meet a need.”
John says his big concern with leaving a bequest in his will is figuring out whether an organization will still be relevant in the future. “We know from research that an effective structure is very likely to result in an organization that will maintain its relevance moving forward,” he says. “So, I need to look at an organization’s governance structure. But, just to cover the bases, I should write a line in the will that will give the executor the flexibility to redirect my gift to a more appropriate choice if warranted.”
If we’re looking for an organization to support, Imagine Canada has developed a Guide to Giving with tips and information for making more meaningful contributions to the causes most important to us. As the guide explains, non-profit organizations are not all treated the same for tax purposes, and only a registered charity can issue a tax receipt. Some activist organizations cannot receive a charitable designation because of their political activities.6 The CanadaHelps website has a section called “Personalized Discovery” to help you find charities and causes tailored to your interests.7
Tracy Gary’s book, Inspired Philanthropy (discussed earlier), is a good tool if you want to leave a legacy and aren’t sure where to begin, or if your giving strategy isn’t working for you. The book includes worksheets and exercises to create a giving and legacy plan, provides questions to ask non-profits, and explains how to partner with advisers and non-profit leaders for outcomes. Gary’s workbook exercises focus the mind, beginning as they do with our values and passions, and then asking us to be specific in identifying our mission, intention and desired outcomes.8 The objective is to achieve more purposeful and satisfying personal giving. Her proposed tasks include discussing our plans with our family. Gary would like to see more transformative philanthropy that addresses the root causes of disadvantage, or promotes equitable living or sustains a healthy planet.
Peter Singer, author, philosopher and one of the founders of the effective altruism movement, says we need to maximize our impact on the planet by doing good in a cost-effective way. In his book The Most Good You Can Do, he gives examples of people who live modestly in order to give more. He cites Julia Wise as an example and includes a breakdown of her annual budget to explain how she can give surprisingly large amounts to charities despite living on a modest wage. He writes that even from a young age, Wise was aware that although she did not lack anything she needed, there were others who did. “Ever since, she has seen every dollar she spends as a dollar taken out of the hands of someone who needs it more than she does. So the question she asks herself is not how much she should give, but how much she should keep.”9
Wise has a blog called Giving Gladly, where she discusses the charitable giving decisions that she and her husband make. They rely for advice on a website called GiveWell, which Singer says has taken the evaluation of charities to a new level. Singer writes, “If you give to one of GiveWell’s top-rated charities, you can be confident that your donation will do good and be highly cost effective.”10 GiveWell’s website currently recommends that donors give 70 percent of their annual donation to the Against Malaria Foundation and 30 percent to the Schistosomiasis Control Initiative.11
There are a variety of charitable strategies that you can pursue while you’re alive that will continue after your death. Over the decades, Claire has been an exceptional volunteer, donating countless hours to many worthy causes. When she turned sixty, people from all corners of her world came out in droves to celebrate her. For a birthday present, they collected money to establish a university scholarship fund in Claire’s name in a field of study dear to her heart. But the scholarship was established well over a decade ago and Claire is not satisfied with its impact. “I’m so irritated about the scholarship fund,” she says, “that I spoke to the university recently to complain. My fund has a big whack of money, but they only give a few thousand dollars each year to a couple of recipients. I never get a financial statement. I asked the donor relations person to give me a report. I want to know why they are giving out so little money, and I want to know how much publicity the university is giving to the availability of this scholarship.” Claire is looking forward to getting the report she requested and is happy she’s still alive and able to have this discussion with the university.
One of our challenges as donors is finding the right charitable fit that meets our expectations. Some version of the issue that Claire raises will be found with many endowed funds, which have a goal of preserving the capital of the fund and disbursing only the income. The author Malcolm Gladwell argues that universities would have more impact if they didn’t hold such large endowments and instead set themselves higher spending goals. “The very fact that you set up an endowment means that you have decided before you start to minimize your impact,” he says. “I’m going to take your dollar, and I’m going to commit to spending five cents of it every year. That’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard . . . If you have $40 billion and you’re Harvard, how many interesting educational things could you do with $40 billion if you gave yourself a ten-year time horizon [to spend it all]?”12 Claire has an advantage in this debate because she is still around to fight for her legacy. And if she’s not happy with the results of her battle, she can make that known and reconsider any future commitments.
Another popular strategy for legacy giving is establishing a fund through a community foundation, which focuses on supporting local initiatives. Community foundations have been around for nearly a century and there are currently 191 of them across Canada, networked through the national Community Foundations of Canada. More than 90 percent of Canadian communities have access to a foundation, and you can find your nearest one through the national website.13 Donations to the foundations come in all sizes and, depending on the community, relatively small amounts can allow you to establish your own fund. For example, in one community foundation, the current limit to set up your own fund is five thousand dollars, and this amount can be donated over ten years. So, if we were able to set aside ten dollars per week for ten years, we could make this happen. One of the benefits of establishing the fund now is that you can see the benefits while you’re alive, and they will continue after your death.
An adviser on charitable giving says that if you intend to use a community foundation for your estate, there are advantages to setting up a fund while you’re alive. “The fund forms a separate agreement that doesn’t have to go into the will,” she says. “The advantage of starting now is you can see how it works. The staff can advise you on setting up the parameters. You get the enjoyment of deciding on your priorities and naming the fund.” However, there are limits to your control over your money. “Sometimes, people want themselves or their children to have full control over the assets,” the adviser says, “but in a community foundation, you are only involved in an advisory capacity. You need to be aware that this is a transfer of assets and you have to relinquish the decision-making power. You are turning your money over to the foundation, so you have to trust them over the long run.”
The adviser stresses the value of working with your community foundation while you’re alive in order to get the best fit for your expectations. As well, she urges us to savour the enjoyment of making a contribution. “I don’t think anyone should save all their giving for after their lifetime,” she says. “There is such a lot of joy in the process.”
Evan is glad he set up a family fund with the community foundation in the small town where his children were born, but he has some concerns. “Our family fund has given grants to several organizations over the years,” he says, “often to sporting groups, maintaining cross-country ski trails, and other things that matter to our family. But I have been disappointed with some of the causes they have funded that are not our priorities.” Also, Evan is not pleased that the foundation has increased its administrative costs. “They’re arguing that if they have more operating revenue, they can raise more money,” he says. “I’ve raised my concerns with the foundation staff. The problem is that most of the other donors are dead, so I need to be their voice as well.” Despite his concerns, Evan is happy that his children will continue to be involved with the family fund, even after he’s no longer alive. “They were born here and grew up here,” he says, “and wherever life takes them, this fund will always keep them connected with their first home. As for me, I’m looking around for some new opportunities to donate more directly to something I really care about. I’m in the process of figuring that out and enjoying the process.”
I asked an adviser on charitable giving about the issue of administrative costs that Evan raises. She says that charities and non-profits should be able to tell you what percentage of their budget they spend on different categories, including operations, fundraising and marketing, versus the amount that is allocated or disbursed to meet their goals. “These are important measures,” she says. “But what you really need to know is the impact the organization is having, and that is much harder to measure. Sometimes, organizations have to spend more in the short term to meet their long-term objectives. As a donor, what you need to ask is, ‘What are the results from my investment?’”
Another organization that plays a major role in many communities is the United Way, a federated network of over ninety local United Way offices in Canada. They are the largest non-governmental funder of social services locally and worldwide, and many of us have contributed to this impressive organization, often as part of their annual workplace drive. United Way doesn’t run its own programs; rather, the organization raises money for social service programs offered by other charities, many of which are unable to do their own fundraising. United Way also researches community needs annually and allocates funds accordingly.
As someone who does not want to see their charitable donation being spent on donor recognition, I have been impressed with the United Way in this regard. When I was getting to know my local United Way office, I was invited to attend a donor luncheon, and I went principally to see how much donor money would be spent on the event. My concerns were alleviated when I found that our simple meal had been catered by one of the United Way recipient organizations, the bouquets of dandelions and daisies on the guest tables were in recycled bottles, and the speaker’s talk was an in-depth analysis of the social issues facing the community and how the organization was responding. Subsequently, I was able to visit some of the organizations funded by United Way and provide some modest help by serving meals or handing out supplies. Such strategies go a long way toward persuading donors like me that my small contribution is well-placed.
The website of Charity Intelligence Canada provides some analytical tools to help us assess our giving decisions. Their searchable database has profiles on over seven hundred Canadian charities, and they assess each one on several measures: transparency and accountability, need for funding and cost efficiency.14 However, they emphasize that the profiles don’t provide information concerning the effectiveness of the charity’s programs. If you’re in discussion with these organizations, knowing their ratings can help you decide what questions to ask.15
All the experiences we have with charitable giving while we’re alive will help us with our estate planning. If we decide to leave a bequest in our will, advisers recommend talking with the designated organization in advance of finalizing our plans so the group can better understand our goals, and we can educate ourselves about their mission. In The 50 Biggest Estate Planning Mistakes . . . and How to Avoid Them, Jean Blacklock and Sarah Kruger tell the story of a lawyer who avoided a costly error by having this conversation.
Her client wanted to leave a gift to a charity that operated a transportation service for seniors and people with disabilities, and she wanted the gift to cover the purchase of a van, as well as ongoing maintenance and repairs. However, as the lawyer found out, the charity could absolutely not accept gifts for repairs and upkeep because that was the responsibility of the municipal government. “Simply writing the client’s original idea into the will would have resulted, at her death, in her executor spending extra time and professional fees to sort out the appropriate approach, with possibly a court application being required.”16
There are many assets other than cash that can be used to provide a legacy benefit to an organization, including life insurance, securities, property and mutual funds, and we need to discuss the specifics of our case with our financial adviser and the charities involved. The CanadaHelps website provides information about the benefits of donating securities or mutual fund shares with an example of how it works.17 In addition, many charitable organizations have someone on staff to help you think through your options.
However, just because you have something to give, don’t assume you’ll find a happy recipient. An adviser in charitable giving reminded me that organizations are not always set up to accept your non-monetary donations. “Some people want to donate material goods, such as houses, paintings or furniture, either for the organization to use or for resale. While this is a thoughtful gesture, organizations can be understaffed and ill-equipped to execute the donor’s wishes.” Other charities have well-designed programs to accept all matter of items and are set up to provide tax receipts and handle other aspects of your bequest. So, if you have goods to donate, look around for programs designed to handle these donations.
Among the many issues you need to consider regarding your bequest is whether you are looking for recognition, and in what form. I asked John about his feelings on this. He’s the man I introduced you to earlier in this chapter who’s trying to identify an organization for his bequest. John says he’s of two minds regarding the issue of recognition. “I have absorbed my religion’s messages about being modest,” he says. “So, I would feel awkward about being publicized. But I also believe that living in a philanthropic way is an example of good behaviour that I want others to copy. It’s good to serve as an example. I need to give this issue more thought.”
Canadian charities and non-profits spend a lot of time trying to figure out whether donors want recognition and, if so, in what form. They think about this on a strategic basis, trying to find ways to marry forms of donor recognition with their organization’s mission. When it comes to the individual donor, they are careful to be guided by personal preference on a case-by-case basis. One charitable adviser told me about helping a couple make a large gift to their church. The couple insisted the gift be anonymous. They had come into some money and didn’t want other people in their congregation to know just how large a sum they had received. They were worried that information about their new-found wealth would change the way people viewed them. The adviser made the anonymous donation successfully and the couple’s secret is safe.
As discussed earlier, one of the important trends in recognition is remembering the volunteers, not just the donors. One example is the donor wall associated with the Aanischaaukamikw Cree Cultural Institute in Oujé-Bougoumou, Quebec. The institute is designed to preserve and study the Cree culture and language, and the donor wall recognizes everyone who made the institute possible—both the donors who made financial contributions and the Cree elders who worked tirelessly to make it a reality. The institute’s executive director says the donor wall is meaningful for the way “it ties our donors to the Cree Elders who promoted its development over the years.”18
Developing a Family Legacy of Giving
One way to multiply the impact of your legacy is to nurture a family tradition of giving back. A recent national survey of parents found that 89 percent believe in inspiring their children to give to charities. When donors are asked what has inspired their charitable commitment, they often credit their upbringing and family modelling.19 An important focus of the Guide to Giving on the Imagine Canada website is advice on how to create a family legacy of giving.20
In my book Teens Gone Wired, I describe the donation strategy our family established around Thanksgiving when our daughters were very young. We explained to them that at this time of year, we give thanks for our good fortune by choosing charities to support. When the practice started, they had no money of their own, so we allocated an amount for them to give to worthy causes of their choice. We’d review as a family the dozens of requests for support we’d received throughout the year. The children could decide to allocate their full amount to one organization or parcel it out to a number of groups. As their priorities changed over the years, so did their choices. Their decisions provided a window into their minds, and I really valued the insight into their preoccupations that I gained from the discussions. Now they have their own families and the legacy of giving continues.
Marion explains that she and her husband used a similar process to ours with their three children. They are young adults now and the impact of their annual giving program is plain to see. “The eldest always gave to wilderness protection,” Marion says, “and I think she’ll have a career working for the environment. The middle child was interested in food banks, and she just travelled to a developing country on a learning journey about food systems. She connected with the staff there and this has become her cause and maybe her career. The youngest always chose the local street mission. He believes in supporting the people who work in the second-hand store because they are being trained and supported by the community.”
Marion values this approach to charitable giving because it has taught her children how society works and the importance of playing their part. “What is really important is understanding the value of non-profit organizations and their role in civil society,” Marion says. “I think we have a scarcity mentality. That’s why people don’t give. They think they need to hang on to every cent because they’ll never have enough. What people don’t realize is you get back what you give. When I think about my own legacy, I realize the values we have instilled in our family will keep on giving long after I’m gone.”
When Tracy Gary, the author of Inspired Philanthropy, was young, her grandmother made her a deal. “For every hour I volunteered and for every dollar I gave of my own money,” she writes, “my grandmother would contribute a dollar to my ‘giving fund’ for future use.”21 Those of us with activist grandchildren and more limited means could quickly bankrupt ourselves, but some version of Gary’s incentive strategy is worth considering. In Gary’s case, her grandmother’s program gave her the philanthropic bug, and Gramma’s gift just keeps on giving.
One of the challenges confronting people with children is how much to designate to charities in their wills. This is how Floyd describes his conundrum: “What is the right allocation between kids and charity on the death of the last parent? Early in life, my perspective was that I would give my kids a debt-free education and their first car, and after that, they were on their own. Everything else would go to charity. Then high housing costs came into the equation, so I want to help out there, both before and after death. But how much more should I give them? If you are part of the Gates-Buffett pledge, you leave ‘a majority’ to charity. But in the case of the wealthy, that still leaves a massive residual for the children. What about the rest of us? This is a complex issue that depends in part on the kids’ needs and expectations, and I’m wondering how to strike the right balance.” Floyd is referring to the Giving Pledge, which was founded in 2010 by Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates to encourage wealthy people to contribute the majority of their wealth to philanthropic causes. The action was inspired by “the example set by millions of people at all income levels who give generously—and often at great personal sacrifice—to make the world better.”22 About thirty years ago, billionaire investor Warren Buffett was quoted as saying he wanted to leave his kids “enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, but not so much that they could do nothing.” After putting his two sons and a daughter through college, he planned to give most of his money to his charitable foundation. He believed that providing his heirs with “a lifetime supply of food stamps just because they came out of the right womb” was both harmful for them and an anti-social act.23
Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is one of the 175 billionaires from twenty-two countries who have signed the Giving Pledge. He says he plans to invest in philanthropic organizations rather than bequeathing his millions directly to his daughters. “If you want to do something for your children and show how much you love them,” he writes in his pledge, “the single best thing—by far—is to support organizations that will create a better world for them and their children. And by giving, we inspire others to give of themselves, whether their money or their time.”24
Floyd is far from alone in worrying about the financial needs of his adult children. In a recent poll, over three-quarters of parents with children over the age of eighteen said they would give their children financial support to help them move out, get married or move in with a partner. High-priced housing and the tough job market for young adults are factors in their thinking. Giving money to your adult children while you are alive rather than waiting until after you’re gone lets you watch them enjoy the money and, also, avoids probate fees (estate administration taxes).25 One of the expressions used for this approach is “giving with warm hands.”
When I asked an estate lawyer whether her clients who have children are leaving money in their wills to charity, she answered that it depends on the size of the estate and the age of the children. “If there’s enough money, then the answer is yes,” she says. “They feel there’s enough money to both satisfy their children’s needs and leave a bequest to their favourite charities. For smaller estates, it depends on the age of the children. By the time my older clients are revising their wills, their children might be in their fifties and more financially secure. At that point, they feel they can place greater emphasis on charitable donations.”
One approach is to treat charity as a child. So, if you have three children, you divide your estate four ways and leave a quarter to charity. That being said, Katy Basi, a Toronto estate lawyer, recommends leaving a precise dollar amount to charity rather than a percentage of the value of your estate. This allows for more effective tax planning and means that the charity doesn’t have to be involved in the administration of the estate to ensure they get every penny owed.
Regardless of how you want to handle your charitable donation, Basi says you need to tell your children up front. “There are many cases where people are reliant on an inheritance, rack up debt and then learn after their parents die that much of the money they counted on is actually going to charity,” she says. “Parents aren’t doing their kids any favours by not talking to them about their plans for their estate.”26 I would add that you shouldn’t wait until your will is written before talking with your children. Consult with them in advance. You may find them much more supportive of your thinking about the value of generosity than you imagine, and they may have some good ideas of their own to contribute to your thinking. Perhaps you’ll be able to create a family legacy of giving that will continue contributing through the generations.
When your expertise lies in business management, taking those skills into the non-profit sector might be the best way of giving back. This was the case for Wayne. He spent decades working for large corporations and serving as a volunteer on non-profit boards. Then he decided he could be more effective by moving into a smaller, more entrepreneurial approach—in both his for-profit and non-profit activities. “Initially, I was on boards of long-established traditional charities,” he says, “where the prime responsibility of board members tends to be leading fundraising initiatives in support of the organization—arts, culture, health care, education, et cetera. Then I shifted into venture capital—funding and helping start-ups, first investing other peoples’ money and then, as an ‘angel,’ investing my own funds. So, I started to apply these same principles of innovation to the philanthropic sector through social venture partnerships. My philanthropic activities came to mirror my venture investing activities.”
Wayne cites SVP Vancouver as an example of “social venture partnership.” The organization currently has 155 partners who are entrepreneurs and business leaders providing selected non-profit organizations with both capital and expertise. Established in 2001, the organization has contributed more than six million dollars and thousands of volunteer hours to more than fifty-seven non-profits in their community. “Social venture is about bringing venture capital principles to non-profits and applying innovative, entrepreneurial models around education, employment of people with barriers, helping youth at risk, homeless, et cetera,” Wayne says.
The SVP Vancouver website gives examples of the non-profits they support and those that have “graduated.” Current recipients include Take a Hike, which offers a full-time alternative education program engaging at-risk youth through adventure-based learning, academics, therapy and community involvement; Learning Disabilities Association Vancouver, which wants to empower every child and youth in Greater Vancouver with a learning disability to achieve lifelong success and happiness; and PEDAL Society, a bike shop and social enterprise that supports youth by offering mechanical repair training, access to bicycles and the skills to ride safely. SVP has chapters in over forty cities around the world.27
Over the past five years, Wayne’s for-profit investing activities have also narrowed into only cause-related businesses. “Many not-for-profits have no way to become sustainable through revenues and must be funded philanthropically,” he says. “But others are in good cause-related businesses; for example, employing people with barriers. There are opportunities to grow those entities via for-profit investment capital like loans.” As an example, Wayne cites CleanStart, a Vancouver-based company offering junk removal, hoarding cleanup and pest control. The vision of company founder Dylan Goggs is to reduce waste and create as many jobs as possible for people with barriers to employment.28 To pursue these kinds of investment opportunities, Wayne participates in Toniic, “the global action community for impact investors.” “Whereas SVP is purely philanthropic,” Wayne explains, “Toniic acts as an investment club for investors in mission-based businesses who expect a financial return rather than a tax credit for donations.”29
Wayne’s goal is to form a personal foundation that will donate to charities like SVP and the creative organizations it supports. The foundation’s capital would be invested in mission-based organizations that generate a reasonable investment income. “I want something that our kids can continue to manage after my wife and I are gone,” he says. Wayne is getting closer to his goal thanks to funds he will receive from the buyout of one of his tech investments. He is doing his homework on the best vehicle for his foundation and is leaning toward CHIMP. CHIMP describes itself as giving everyone their own free foundation, along with a toolset that allows them to give to and fundraise for any registered charity in Canada, on their own or with friends, family and social networks.30 Wayne likes the simplicity of CHIMP’s high-tech platform and its service levels and flexibility.31
Wayne’s example may seem far removed from the world of charitable giving that many of us inhabit, but his story contains lessons that are broadly applicable. When we’re thinking about donating money to an organization, we should also consider whether contributing our skills and expertise could make a difference. And if we come into some financial means through hard work, inheritance or luck of the draw, we should consider how to turn that money into a vehicle that keeps on giving.
When someone dies, the obituary will often identify an organization where people can make an in memoriam donation in the name of the deceased loved one. As I wrote earlier, since KS’s death, I’ve started asking people what group they would choose to receive donations in their memory. This question requires people to identify an organization or a cause they would most like to be associated with at the time of their death. Not everyone has an immediate answer. Although lots of us donate time and money to a variety of organizations, it’s a tough call to decide which one would best represent our time here on earth and our hopes for the future.
When I asked Meredith if she could identify an organization she would like people to donate to in her memory, she admitted to being at a loss. “I have no idea,” she said. “I’m going to set myself the goal of figuring this out. I’d want to designate a group I’d been directly involved with. And I’d want a history with the organization, say a ten-year commitment of volunteering. I haven’t found a group I could do this with yet, but I’m looking.” Nancy also couldn’t name an in memoriam recipient when I interviewed her. She has recently changed jobs and feels her decision is going to be easier. “I work for an organization reporting on the environment,” she says. “So, I get a close look at lots of different groups and can see their level of effectiveness first-hand. I’m starting to narrow the field.”
When I told a financial adviser that I was asking people to identify an in memoriam recipient, she thought it was a good idea. “If you don’t discuss this issue in advance with your loved ones,” she said, “they are left to make their own decisions on your behalf. Unfortunately, what I’ve seen happen too many times is that people focus on the way someone died, rather than on the way they lived. When people ask for my advice about memorial donations, I always start with the question, ‘What were your loved one’s interests?’ But in the moment of grief, people don’t always think that way, and they end up memorializing people by the circumstances of their death. But this shouldn’t define their lives. To avoid this, try and have these conversations while you’re alive.”
This is a good point at which to revisit my misgivings about the legacy of KS. As I wrote earlier, I felt that the choice of a lecture series at the local university for her in memoriam donations was limited, touching, as it did, on only one aspect of her complex and multi-faceted impact on her world. But I had no way of knowing how KS would have wanted to be remembered, and I regretted never asking her. So, I decided to give my assumptions some deeper scrutiny. After reaching out to KS’s colleagues, friends and family to ask their opinions, I concluded that my concern was misplaced.
KS’s son told me he was grateful for the lecture series. He has attended a number of the lectures, and they solidified his knowledge of his mother’s professional contribution and added to his understanding of her impact on the lives of others. “As well, I learned that she brought the same warmth and sense of humour into her work that I experienced at home,” he says. “And I saw how she touched others with her joy.”
When I asked KS’s sister for her opinion, she was confident that KS would have been happy with leaving the university connection as her legacy. “She really enjoyed teaching there,” she says. “Her legacy is about being a woman breaking into her field, which was really difficult at the time. She was in the forefront and it’s nice to have this acknowledged. And our mother was still alive when KS died, and this tribute made her very proud.”
KS’s colleague told me that along with the lecture series, there is a scholarship awarded every year in KS’s honour. The recipient will often write a thank-you note to KS’s family, referring to what KS’s accomplishments have meant to them. As well, I learned that the lecture series was not the only in-memoriam tribute. In the obituary placed in the local paper, the family requested donations to the neighbourhood food bank. The donors received a thank-you note from the family, saying that KS “always and everywhere cared for people.” In addition, there are two benches with commemorative plaques for KS in neighbourhood parks. The plaques acknowledge that she “actively contributed a great deal of caring, time and energy to her friends and community.” So I can see that more sides of my dear KS have found the light of day in her legacy.
In addition to a legacy of tributes after her death, while she was alive, KS left a recording of herself for her family. The next chapter looks at the many ways we leave pieces of ourselves that live on after we’ve gone.