GEOGRAPHY KEY TO MAPPING PHILANTHROPIC STYLES
WHERE WE LIVE INFLUENCES HOW AND WHAT WE GIVE

Boston Globe
Author: By Scott Bernard Nelson, Globe Staff
Date: 11/24/2002
Page: U7
Section: Living

Philanthropy, as with other areas of American culture, comes with different accents in different parts of the country. Those who follow charitable giving nationwide say the differences are noticeable both in terms of how deep people dig into their wallets and the ways in which they give.

Massachusetts residents, for example, tend to give a smaller percentage of their incomes to charity than residents of almost every other state, but they spend more time volunteering with nonprofit groups. And traditionally, Bay Staters and their neighbors across New England are less comfortable making public displays of their largesse than are philanthropists elsewhere.

"Our older families who are patrons of our leading philanthropic institutions do so in a kind of very modest, understated manner," said George McCully, coordinator for the Worcester-based Catalogue for Philanthropy, which tracks rates of giving in different states. "There's no question New England lags behind the rest of the country in the mega-gifts that grab everybody's attention."

But the differences between areas "are a very complex phenomenon," McCully said, and may be in the process of realigning along generational lines as much as - or more than - regional ones. Young entrepreneurs who made their fortunes in the '90s tend to be more interested in so-called venture philanthropy.

Melissa Berman, chief executive of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors in New York, said she sees three general types of givers: those loyal to a small group of long-standing institutions, those who spread their support to numerous existing organizations in one community, and those who want to start new organizations or get deeply involved in running charitable institutions.

"Some of the differences are generational," Berman said. "More people new to philanthropy are interested in having a tight connection with their giving than ever before."

And nationwide, she said, philanthropic styles go through an ebb and flow, depending on economic conditions and events happening in the wider culture.

Early in the last century, for example, corporate philanthropists such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller built many of the philanthropic organizations and institutions that continue to play an important role today. In the 1960s, Americans of more modest means also became involved and helped shift the focus to local, community-based groups. More recently, the emphasis has moved toward creating organizations modeled on venture capital firms or high-tech start-ups.

Still, Berman said, strong regional biases remain. She said one of the big reasons that's true is that geographic wealth distribution is so uneven.

"In some areas where the need is the greatest, in Appalachia, in rural areas, in huge areas of the American West, there isn't much philanthropy because there isn't much money," she said. "On the Eastern Seaboard, the West Coast, Florida, parts of Texas, the bigger cities in the Midwest, there are more financial resources and, therefore, more styles of giving."

Both McCully and Berman say patterns of giving are continually evolving to the point that regional stereotypes don't fit easily.

McCully points out that a concerted effort in New England to draw attention to the relatively low rate of giving has helped change residents' philanthropic habits in the past five years, boosting levels of giving. And Berman said the Sept. 11 attacks led more people coast to coast to give to charitable causes than any other time in history.

How a region continues that philanthropic evolution will play a key role in the future life of that region, McCully said.

"We're not going to have a quality of life on par with Seattle and the Bay Area unless we invest as much [in our charities] as Seattle and the Bay Area," he said. "And they're investing a hell of a lot. What is our response going to be?"