Search

Site map

Sections:
Home Page

Gifts & Grants

Fund Raising

Managing Nonprofit Groups

Technology

Philanthropy Today

Jobs

Features:
Guide to Grants

The Nonprofit Handbook

Facts & Figures

Events

Deadlines

The Chronicle in Print:
Current Issue

Back Issues

Sponsored Information
Products & Services:
Directory of Services

Guide to Managing Nonprofits

Continuing-Education Guide

Fund-Raising Services Guide

Technology Guide

Customer Service:
About The Chronicle

How to Contact Us

How to Subscribe

How to Register

Manage Your Account

How to Advertise

Press Inquiries

Feedback

Privacy Policy

User Agreement

Help


The Chronicle of Philanthropy
Opinion

October 10, 2008

Company Asks Public to Direct Its Giving

TripAdvisor, a Web site that helps visitors book airplane tickets and hotels, is the most recent grant maker to get into so-called participatory philanthropy, that is, allowing the public to vote online for which cause the company supports.

The company, in Newton, Mass., is asking people to choose between five large charities: Conservation International, Doctors Without Border, the National Geographic Society, the Nature Conservancy, and Save the Children. TripAdvisor will divide $1-million among the organizations based on the percentage of votes each garners. Polls close November 9.

American Express and several nonprofit funds have created similar grant-making programs. Read about The Chronicle’s article about public participation in philanthropy.

Critics of the strategy, which some deride as American Idol-style philanthropy, argue it will lead to giving that takes less risks and focuses only on well-known causes.

What do you think of such giving programs? Which nonprofit group would you vote for?

Ian Wilhelm

Comments

  1. I think it’s fine for TripAdvisor to ask the public where how they would like to see the $1 million allocated, after all this company does not have to make any charitable gifts at all. I could argue that the five that they chose represent a rather narrow swath of potential areas, since 3 of the five are international health/child related, one is enviornmental (US and world), and the final one is (NGS) is both educational and environmental.

    I think it’s a positive sign of establishing two way communication, as opposed to the model of just supporting whatever the CEO cares about.

    Regards,

    Bill Huddleston
    www.cfcfundraising.com

    — Bill Huddleston    Oct 13, 12:40 PM    #

Commenting is closed for this article.



Copyright © 2009 The Chronicle of Philanthropy