Why We Welcome Critique About Trust-Based Philanthropy
By Chantias Ford
4/18/2024
“They are attacking TBP!!”
I opened the email from a frantic colleague, concerned about the recent pushbacks we’ve been seeing in the sector towards trust-based philanthropy (TBP).
If you’ve been keyed into the discourse happening in the sector, you’re no stranger to these critiques – from blogs, articles, conference sessions, LinkedIn comments, and interpersonally. Recently, they seem to be occurring more frequently, and the TBP Project staff, steering committee, ambassadors, and advocates alike have flocked to social media and communications mediums to produce responses – clarifying misperceptions, giving talking points, and calling in the dissenting voices.
We’ve found that, oftentimes, those critiquing trust-based philanthropy are either doing it for self-serving reasons (utilizing a buzzphrase and/or something controversial to promote their work or perspective), or they may simply not have a deep enough understanding of this nuanced approach. Nonetheless, it can be disorienting – especially for the hundreds of funders who have aligned around this work. However, we are not opposed to critique. In fact, under the right circumstances, we welcome it.
Here are a few reasons why we don’t shy away from critical questions and misperceptions about trust-based philanthropy:
They Inspire Us to Iterate. Much like the practice of trust-based philanthropy, the way we understand and articulate this framework continues to evolve based on what we’re learning from practitioners and how it’s being received in the field. This framework is consistently evolving and we’re adding new examples and thinking on this work. Critiques have helped us recognize what additional tools, programming, or resources we need to disseminate in order to help better capture and share the complexity and possibilities of taking a trust-based approach.
They are an Opportunity to Live Into Our Values. Our values include embracing learning and collaborating with humility and curiosity. Critical or skeptical viewpoints are an opportunity to lean in and continue to practice our organizational culture of learning. We know our efforts will be more effective and impactful when we take the time to learn, reflect, and better understand others’ perspectives.
They Demonstrate the Complexity of this Framework. Those most engaged still grapple with the deeper nuance of this approach. Oftentimes, skeptics take one aspect of trust-based philanthropy and run with it – without understanding the nuance and complexity of this work. These surface-level critiques rarely reflect the depth of our resources and programs, further elevating the point that this work takes deep thought, time, and energy – not a quick overview.
They Help Us Get Better At Making The Case. While a significant number of grantmakers are actively operationalizing trust-based philanthropy within their organizations, many find friction when it comes to making the case with certain stakeholders. While squarely in our “amen corner”, we don’t want to lose sight of those who aren’t sold on the approach. Hearing these critiques helps us to refine and reiterate our talking points in a way that meets people where they are. As we get better at strengthening our communication, we hope it will also help those working to make the case to board members, leaders, and other skeptics.
As you can see, there are various reasons why we don’t want to shy away from the critiques of trust-based philanthropy. But while we benefit from some critique, we do hope critics and skeptics alike will take on the responsibility of understanding this as a holistic, values-driven approach. Specifically:
Educating yourself on what TBP actually is, and what it encourages. Oftentimes we have found that the critiques do not fully encompass what it means to be a trust-based funder, or they conflate trust-based philanthropy with certain practices or approaches. These surface-level misperceptions can spread misinformation and are harmful to the overall movement.
Checking your assumptions about perceived gaps in the approach. We have a wealth of information on our website, including resources, program recordings, case studies, and blogs, sharing different elements of this work from a diversity of funders, representing different roles, regions, and funding priorities. Before preparing a critical response detailing what trust-based philanthropy misses, a simple website search may help you better understand the interconnected components of this approach.
Engaging with us from a place of curiosity. Rather than using public platform to negate the framework, reach out to us to have a conversation about it. TBP staff and advocates are open to discussing and adding to the strong foundation that has already been built in this work. It is much easier to do that with a conversation built on curiosity rather than damage control and reconciliation.
Overall, we hope critics will consider both the intent and impact of vocalizing dissent. Is your intent to be provocative and/or to draw engagement? Even if your intent is simply to be insightful and intellectual, there can be harmful outcomes. Critiques can disparage funders from adopting this approach, which can further perpetuate the harms trust-based philanthropy is seeking to address. If your intention is truly to improve the sector, we hope you can consider ways to get your message across without deterring progress.
If we can engage in these ways I think we will find we have more commonalities than things separating us. Trust-based philanthropy’s ultimate goal is greater impact- I’m sure that’s something many critics can agree on.
Chantias Ford is the Director of Programs and Strategic Learning at the Trust-Based Philanthropy Project.
