Philanthropy’s success in tackling a slew of compounding crises might depend on how well institutional, corporate and individual funders can play with others — and whether they can “build” instead of “fix” — a panel of top foundation leaders said yesterday during a panel on philanthropy at the Milken Institute’s Global Conference in Los Angeles.

The panel, titled “Investing in Hope: Philanthropy for What’s Next,” included speakers from some of the largest philanthropic foundations in the United States: Tonya Allen president of the McKnight Foundation; John Palfrey, president of the MacArthur Foundation; Maura Pally Executive Director of the Blackstone Charitable Foundation; Shamina Singh, founder and president of the Mastercard Center for Inclusive Growth; and Mark Suzman, CEO of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The panel was moderated by Melissa Stevens, the Milken Institute’s executive vice president of philanthropy.

In addition to greater cooperation and creativity, several of the panelists called for philanthropists and their foundations to be more generous — as both the situation demands it and as ultra-wealthy individuals have grown even wealthier in recent years. 

“The truth is, we are at a moment, globally and nationally, in the U.S., where the one group of people who have grown significantly wealthier over the last decade are the extremely wealthy. And so there is a massive potential to give at greater scale and at greater impact,” said Suzman, whose foundation recently announced it was spending down over the next 20 years. 

Asked by Stevens how to get more funding “in the game,” Palfrey suggested that philanthropic foundations increase their payout floor, citing the MacArthur Foundation’s decision to raise its level from 5% to 6%. 

“There is more need in the world. We can move the capital. We think there will be a higher social return on the dollars out the door than in our endowments,” he said. 

Suzman noted that there is growing skepticism about philanthropy, along with other major institutions like government and higher education. His foundation’s primary funder, Bill Gates, for instance, has recently faced renewed scrutiny over his relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.

“We’re in a maximum moment of institutional distrust of big institutions, whether it’s government, whether it’s the private sector, even a little bit philanthropy,” Suzman said. “So the burden on all of us collectively is to prove and show not just good intent, but real outcomes that are making a difference in people’s lives, that are measurable, whether it’s saving a kid’s life, whether it’s providing an education opportunity, whether it’s providing a job. And so for us, that’s the moment of real opportunity we’re in.”

Asked by Stevens what role philanthropy should play in responding to “rapid overlapping change” sparked by political instability, economic uncertainty and the rapid onset of artificial intelligence, Palfrey offered a sports metaphor, calling for philanthropy to be a team sport. 

“In philanthropy… largely how we operate, [is] as tennis players,” Palfery said. “We make some money, we go out to the tennis club, we win our match, we lose our match, we give the money for something. I think we need to be more like a basketball team, where we play our position.”

Through cross-field collaboration, said Palfrey, funders can tackle big problems without any individual funder facing a financial “flop.”  

“If we think about how a corporation, like MasterCard and Blackstone, [can] work with Gates and MacKnight and MacArthur and a bunch of individuals [to] say, ‘We’re going to bring about an inclusive economy… [and] we are blocking the downsides of what could happen that would be terrible for humanity.’ We have a much better shot as a basketball team than as a single tennis player.”

The panelists described philanthropy as uniquely positioned between government and private sector, having the resources to focus on “social good” and also pursuing innovation without risking taxpayer money should an investment not pan out. Uncertainty about the outcome of a donation can hold some philanthropists back from donating, said Suzman, but as economic divides increase, philanthropists at all levels should be more willing to get involved, he said. 

Unity across the field has also helped funders fend off “attacks” from the federal government, said Suzman. 

Suzman offered the example of Unite in Advance, a public campaign — spearheaded by Allen and Palfrey — supported by hundreds of foundations from across the country pushing back on the federal government’s “revenue and funding freezes; and investigations against universities, law firms, and businesses.” A number of Jewish funders have signed on, among them Charles & Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies, Jacob and Hilda Blaustein Foundation and others. 

While most of the panelists spoke either ambivalently or optimistically about AI technology’s potential to advance social progress, Allen shared a more cynical outlook. “I just want us to just actually challenge convention. Just because tech people tell us this is going to be good for us, doesn’t mean it is,” she said. 

As communities face significant and rapid change driven by artificial intelligence and economic disruption, said Allen, philanthropists will have to stop focusing on short-term problem solving and instead create “a builder’s culture.” 

“Are we equipping our communities to have the skill and the muscle to be able to even think about, ‘How do you build for the future?’ No, we are not… We need to create and build a builder’s culture, not just a fixer’s culture, because we’re not going to be able to go backward in this world and in this society,” Allen said. 

“I’m not going to sit up here and pretend like AI is going to be fantastic for humans when we haven’t figured out the solutions, we haven’t figured out how to create the kind of economic opportunity where humans will thrive, like most of us will, because we’ve invested in it. But the majority of Americans have not.”