Donors Face New Dangers Amid Increasing Political Violence and Attacks on Charitable Foundations

11 Trends in Philanthropy for 2026 report cover

This article was first published in our 11 Trends in Philanthropy for 2026 report. Explore the full report here.

Want the latest trends, research, and more delivered right to your inbox? Subscribe to the Johnson Center’s email newsletter.

There is a new kind of danger confronting the philanthropic sector.

Previous Trends articles have explored the dangers nonprofits and the public might face due to the potential influence of tainted money (Moody & Pratt, 2020) and anonymous donors (Martin & Layton, 2024) on philanthropic work. A separate but related article published by the Johnson Center (Moody, 2022), which continues to garner attention, cataloged the different kinds of harm philanthropy can unwittingly inflict.

Yet we could not have anticipated the rise of a new danger to donors themselves, and the chilling effect that recent acts of political violence and executive orders could have on a wary sector.

A National Tradition of Associational Life

A vibrant and independent civil society — the network of organizations, associations, and community groups that are adjacent to the public sphere — has been a hallmark of U.S. society dating back to the 18th century. Organizations such as congregations, local sports leagues, food pantries, immigrant aid groups, and hospitals, as well as civic and mutual aid clubs, formed the basis of what Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about in Democracy in America when he said, “Americans of all ages, all stations of life, and all types of disposition are forever forming associations” (Tocqueville, 1838). Embedded in this idea is the value of plurality that undergirds the sector and our national credo.

While tactics to limit participation in civil society have been well documented and are increasing across the globe (Kleinfeld, 2024), donors continue to find and fund innovative ways to give. For example, donors are supporting public-private partnership efforts (Lam, 2023), a topic Martin explored in the 2021 Trend, “Philanthropy and Government Play Increasingly Overlapping Roles in the Public Sphere,” and making transformational “big bet” donations (Buteau et al, 2023). Data from Giving USA’s 2025 Annual Report (Giving USA Foundation, 2025) show that giving actually grew by 3.3% (when adjusting for inflation) in 2024 and that individual giving increased, making up two-thirds of all giving.

As Pasic (2025) shared:

We see the strength and resilience of charitable giving in a year like 2024, as growth in total giving returned. The role of the individual donor cannot be overstated. Individuals were responsible for the largest share of all donations made last year, and they continue to play a central role in our nation’s philanthropic sector. (as cited in Giving USA Foundation, 2025, para. 5)

Is Giving Political?

Philanthropy, according to Robert Payton (1988), is “voluntary action for the public good.” The IRS tax code differentiates between 501(c)(3)s, which are not allowed to engage directly in the politics of campaigns and elections, and 501(c)(4)s, which are. The public good supported by individuals’ generosity is, arguably, meant to operate substantially outside the sphere of politics.

However, scholar Lucy Bernholz makes a different argument: “Giving is political in that it is a statement of values, something to build community around, and something that powers communities. Giving is also political because we write laws that privilege certain behaviors” (Bernholz, 2021, p. 25), such as charitable tax incentives that prioritize a small number of wealthy people who itemize their taxes. In this way, giving is neither wholly democratic nor completely independent of public systems and public policy.

Still, Bernholz defines a line between what ought to be politics and what ought to be protected First Amendment behavior. Issues of anonymity and transparency in philanthropy, she writes, stem from the same intention of fostering broad public trust. To summarize her argument, we want transparency in political donations so we know who influences the people making decisions on our behalf, but we allow charitable donors to maintain anonymity to protect associational life from interference.

“[W]e want transparency in political donations so we know who influences the people making decisions on our behalf, but we allow charitable donors to maintain anonymity to protect associational life from interference.”

The Chilling Effect on Civil Society

When the philanthropic coalition, Unite In Advance, comprised of nearly 200 foundations and funds, released a statement in September 2025, they were responding to an urgent shift in our public space:

Organizations should not be attacked for carrying out their missions or expressing their values in support of the communities they serve. We reject attempts to exploit political violence to mischaracterize our good work or restrict our fundamental freedoms, like freedom of speech and the freedom to give. (para. 4)

A series of recent executive orders targeted many of philanthropy’s most prominent issue areas, including racial and gender equity, climate change, and immigration, and organizations such as the Ford Foundation and Open Society Foundations (National Council of Nonprofits, 2025). Additionally, we have seen a rise in political violence, including the assassination and attempted assassination of two state legislators in Minnesota (Sullivan et al., 2025) and that of activist Charlie Kirk (Schoenbaum et al., 2025). Taken together, these realities have led individual, family, and institutional donors to examine the political nature of giving, and whether it is even safe to give. As The Chronicle of Philanthropy reports, some organizations and executives are taking new measures to keep staff safe, including hiring online privacy experts, changing event logistics, and retaining security details (Gose, 2025).

“Many of the wealthiest donors have spent 2025 in a state of paralysis, overwhelmed by uncertainty and unsure where their giving will be most effective.”

Many of the wealthiest donors spent 2025 in a state of paralysis, overwhelmed by uncertainty and unsure where their giving could be most effective. Some donors may be looking for increased anonymity and privacy in giving (DiMento, 2025), so as not to draw attention to themselves. This can be especially true when donors are supporting issues that are under public scrutiny and attack. As a result, nonprofits are beseeching donors to reaffirm their commitments and support organizations on the front lines. Continuing to give, paying multi-year pledges early, giving unrestricted support, and offering other forms of giving — like technical assistance and mobilizing support from others — will all help nonprofits weather this current crisis and continue to deliver on their missions.

While we do not expect this giving context to change quickly, donors and nonprofits alike must continue to weigh risk, evaluate ethical considerations, and pursue values-based work. For donors and foundations, this level of scrutiny and political meddling may feel new, but giving has always been political. The question now is: will donors continue to give and resource the organizations that are responding to the urgent and real needs of our communities when it matters most?

REFERENCES

Bernholz, L. (2021). How we give now: A philanthropic guide for the rest of us. MIT Press.

Buteau, E., Smith Arrillaga, E., & Im, C. (2023). Emerging impacts: The effects of MacKenzie Scott’s large, unrestricted gifts. The Center for Effective Philanthropy. https://cep.org/report-backpacks/emerging-impacts-the-effects-of-mackenzie-scotts-large-unrestricted-gifts/?finding=1&slide=1#finding1

de Tocqueville, A. (1838). Democracy in America. G. Dearborn & Co.

DiMento, M. (2025, October 8). What fundraisers should know about big donors’ thinking right now. The Chronicle of Philanthropy. https://www.philanthropy.com/news/what-fundraisers-should-know-about-big-donors-thinking-right-now/

Giving USA Foundation. (2025, June 24). Giving USA 2025: U.S. charitable giving grew to $592.50 billion in 2024, lifted by stock market gains [Press Release]. https://givingusa.org/giving-usa-2025-u-s-charitable-giving-grew-to-592-50-billion-in-2024-lifted-by-stock-market-gains/

Gose, B. (2025, September 18). Nonprofits—and their leaders—seek security amid threats. The Chronicle of Philanthropy. https://www.philanthropy.com/news/nonprofits-and-their-leaders-seek-security-amid-threats/

Kleinfeld, R. (2024). Closing civic space in the United States: Connecting the dots, changing the trajectory. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/03/closing-civic-space-in-the-united-states-connecting-the-dots-changing-the-trajectory?lang=en

Lam, D. (2023, July 28). The essential role of public-private partnerships in future building. Philanthropy News Digest. https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/features/commentary-and-opinion/the-essential-role-of-public-private-partnerships-in-future-building

Martin, T. (2021, January 19). Philanthropy and government play increasingly overlapping roles in the public sphere. 11 trends in philanthropy for 2021. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University. https://johnsoncenter.org/blog/philanthropy-and-government-play-increasingly-overlapping-roles-in-the-public-sphere/

Martin, T., & Layton, M. (2024, January 17). Donor anonymity is under the microscope. 11 trends in philanthropy for 2024. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University. https://johnsoncenter.org/blog/donor-anonymity-is-under-the-microscope/

Moody, M. (2022, February 1). Philanthropic harm: How “doing good” can go bad. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University. https://johnsoncenter.org/blog/types-of-philanthropic-harm-a-working-list/

Moody, M., & Pratt, M. (2020, December 22). Tainted money and tainted donors: A growing crisis? 11 trends in philanthropy for 2020. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University. https://johnsoncenter.org/blog/tainted-money-and-tainted-donors-a-growing-crisis/

National Council of Nonprofits. (2025, February 25). Judge issues national injunction to block Trump administration’s devastating attempt to halt funding for essential services. https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/pressreleases/judge-issues-national-injunction-block-trump-administrations-devastating-attempt-halt

Payton, R. L. (1988). Philanthropy: Voluntary action for the public good. Bloomsbury Academic.

Schoenbaum, H., Durkin Richer, A., & Sherman, M. (2025, September 10). Conservative activist Charlie Kirk dies after being shot at Utah Valley University event. PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservative-activist-charlie-kirk-shot-at-utah-valley-university-event-spokesperson-says

Sullivan, T., Karnowski, S., & Durkin Richer, A. (2025, June 14). Minnesota lawmaker killed in “politically motivated” shooting, authorities search for suspect. PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/minnesota-lawmaker-and-her-husband-killed-in-politically-motivated-shooting-walz-says

Unite in Advance. (2025). Statement on political violence and the fundamental freedom of speech. Medium. https://medium.com/@uniteinadvance/statement-on-the-fundamental-freedom-of-speech-b98c1c6db4e2

Donors Face New Dangers Amid Increasing Political Violence and Attacks on Charitable Foundations

A National Tradition of Associational Life

Is Giving Political?

The Chilling Effect on Civil Society

Donor Anonymity Is Under the Microscope

Tainted Money and Tainted Donors: A Growing Crisis?

Increasing Critiques of (Big) Philanthropy

REFERENCES