Controversy Over Donor’s Role Causes Smithsonian to Lose $36.5-Million

The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation, in McLean, Va., has canceled the bulk of its $38-million pledge to the Smithsonian Institution, touching off a debate in the nonprofit world about how much control major donors should have over their gifts.

The Reynolds gift, the third largest in Smithsonian history, was to have paid for an exhibit on American achievers, such as Nobel laureates and Pulitzer Prize winners, at the National Museum of American History, in Washington. The gift also would have underwritten an annual achievement award for individual accomplishments in the arts, science, or public service. The foundation had already paid $1.5-million of the gift, for planning purposes.

Ms. Reynolds, who came up with the idea for the exhibit, suggested at the time she announced her pledge that those honored might include the ice skater Dorothy Hamill and the television reporter Sam Donaldson, comments that drew criticism from those who felt such people did not have a place in a scholarly institution like the Smithsonian.

Ms. Reynolds said in a letter to Lawrence M. Small, secretary of the Smithsonian, that she was rescinding the gift because she felt the exhibit would not focus enough on “the power of the individual,” which was her goal for the gift. In a written response, Mr. Small spoke of the frustrations of putting together a museum exhibit, but did not directly address the question of the exhibit’s content.

Mr. Small, whose background is in business, not academe, has come under fire for his management of the Smithsonian. Specifically, some say he has emphasized building relationships with donors like Ms. Reynolds rather than focusing on the museum’s scholarly pursuits. The Smithsonian receives 70 percent of its budget from the federal government, and the rest comes from donations from individuals and foundations.

Marc Pachter, acting director of the National Museum of American History, which would have received Ms. Reynolds’s gift, said that Mr. Small’s willingness to let the gift go signals that he does place scholarship ahead of a donor’s wishes. “This proves that Secretary Small is on the side of Smithsonian control and content,” he said.

Historians’ Rebuke

The Reynolds gift sparked controversy from the time it was announced last May. Critics charged that the gift derived more from Ms. Reynolds’s wishes than from the museum’s needs, and that the exhibit’s content would be below museum standards.

Museum curators, not donors, should lead the direction of exhibits and projects, said Arnita A. Jones, executive director of the American Historical Association, in Washington. The exhibits and projects “need to be carefully thought through as part of a long-range plan, and then you go and find sponsors for what you have decided to do. In this case, the reverse was true.”

The association, a nonprofit organization that represents 15,000 historians, issued a resolution last summer urging the Smithsonian to revise its agreement with the Reynolds Foundation to make sure that the “principles of curatorial control and historical integrity” are upheld.

But in an interview, Ms. Reynolds said that Smithsonian officials always had final say over execution of the gift.

“Our contract was very, very clear that the ultimate say was always with the museum,” she said. “I would never say we ever wanted to control it all, or even be part of the process in terms of making decisions, but help clarify the vision.” She said several museums had approached the foundation about receiving a gift to revive the exhibit, but she declined to name them, saying she has made no decision to take the project elsewhere.

Mr. Pachter said he does not think that major donors will cease giving to the Smithsonian because of the controversy surrounding the Reynolds gift.

“I would bet you good money that we will continue to attract substantial donors, because the Smithsonian is that important to the American people,” he said, adding that donors “know we don’t have the money to create and refresh our exhibitions without some private support.”