How We Can Stop Hate Groups From Abusing Philanthropy to Raise Money

Hate crimes, bias incidents, and speech that encourages violence are on the rise across America. The evidence – from federal agencies, advocacy organizations, and scholars – reinforces what most observers already recognize: increased mass shootings, attacks on houses of worship, and a resurgence in white supremacist activity. Terror attacks such as the Tree of Life synagogue and El Paso shootings, as well as the burning of black churches and the increasing number of bias incidents and violent hate crimes against Muslims, Jews, immigrants, and LGBT people, remind us all of the urgent necessity of confronting this growing extremism.

Indeed, the FBI has recently elevated racially motivated violent extremists to a “national threat priority.” Likewise, the Department of Homeland Security has increased security grants for nonprofit organizations and houses of worship. And, in January, the House Committee on Financial Services heard testimony – from the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League, and other leading groups – on the threat posed by white supremacist groups and ways that technology companies and others could help disrupt hate activity.

But the responsibility of safeguarding society from hate cannot be left to government alone. Civil society institutions, especially the powerful world of philanthropy, should actively participate in mitigating the short- and long-term impact of hate activity. Most of all, grant makers should protect themselves from being used by hate groups whose rhetoric and actions tear apart the very fabric of our country, dividing us along our most fragile lines.

Hate groups need money to fund their rallies, websites, recruitment and indoctrination efforts, and other activities. And they have raised millions of dollars by using the tax code to provide a veneer of legitimacy and respectability even as they promote agendas antithetical to the very meaning of philanthropy.

The rapid growth of donor advised funds in recent years, in particular, has allowed hate groups to raise money from donors who can remain anonymous.

While the vast majority of DAF funding to hate groups stems from commercially backed charities such as Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund, Schwab Charitable Fund, and Vanguard Charitable — these three combined plus the nonprofit DonorsTrust gave nearly $11 million from mid-2014 through 2017, according to a recent Sludge analysis — community foundations face the same challenge when their donors recommend grants to hate groups from their DAFs.

Community foundations contribute directly to the building and functioning of a healthy and inclusive democratic society in cities and regions around the country. That’s why community foundations have an important role to play in ensuring they do not inadvertently fund hate in the very communities they serve.

Leaders of community funds and others have begun taking steps and raising awareness to solve this problem. A growing number of community funds, joined by workplace giving programs, grant makers, and corporate entities are making decisions to screen out hate groups that try to raise money from their employees and donors. One particularly promising effort is the “Hate is Not Charitable” campaign led by the Amalgamated Foundation. It asks foundations and nonprofits to pledge that their donor funds will not be delivered to hate groups. The pledge campaign has gathered more than 80 institutional sponsors and has amplified an important national discussion.

Last fall, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Council on American-Islamic Relations gathered dozens of experts in philanthropy, academe, and advocacy to better understand what is happening and what community foundations and others can learn from other sectors to help mitigate the threat. Afterward, we asked experts and those working in the sector to further identify the opportunities available to help philanthropy screen out hate and the obstacles that might get in the way. Here are some of the ideas identified in a new report we are releasing today:

Recognize tools already available to foundations. Community foundations, workplace giving programs, and other philanthropic organizations have more guidance at their disposal than they may know. As one participant at the fall meeting said: “We simply should not grant money to organizations that promote ideas for which a staff member would get fired for within our own organizations.” In other words, foundations should adapt their grant making policies to the agreements they craft with people who create donor-advised funds at their organizations. They can include prohibiting discrimination and promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in the distribution of funds.

Learn from others. The problem of hate groups raising money and attention from organizations that are play intermediary roles is not unique to philanthropy. In fact, social media and other internet companies have been coping with the same issue.

Unfortunately, it took the tragic events in Charlottesville in 2017 — when a car drove into a crowd of people protesting the United the Right rally, killing one person and injuring dozens of others — for the tech industry to realize that it needs to play a more active role in ensuring Facebook, PayPal, and other platforms are not used to spread hate and promote violence. That incident, along with pressure from Change the Terms – a coalition of civil rights organizations that provided a carefully vetted set of model policies – prompted the tech industry to start to make important inroads. It’s clear, though, that much more must be done.

Collaborate, consult, and coordinate. Most philanthropic organizations have neither the capacity nor expertise to carry out the complex work of identifying, tracking, and preventing hate groups from raising money through donor-advised funds. Therefore, grant makers should redouble efforts to collaborate, consult, and coordinate with peer institutions, membership organizations, and counterparts in academe and advocacy to find shared approaches and develop tools to resolve the problem.

As hate groups continue to influence the mainstream through the cover of legitimate activity, it will take a dedicated and collective effort to push dangerous speech and hate activity back to the far fringes of society. Philanthropy can play a critical role in restoring faith in the public good and the promise of civic engagement. Of course, this journey demands transparency, dialogue, and collaboration. Let’s all join together to ensure we put an end to the spread of hate.