Effective Philanthropy – A Funder’s Perspective
Brian Hatton, OKC Philanthropy Advisor
Philanthropy in Ireland is growing in ambition and depth, with a rise in strategic, values-led giving by individuals, families and corporates, underpinned by a National Philanthropy Strategy and the wonderful work of Philanthropy Ireland. Alongside established leaders like Community Foundation Ireland, Rethink Ireland and The Ireland Funds among others, we’re also seeing a welcome increase in new individual and family foundations.
At OKC, we’re proud to be part of this evolving landscape, and to work with expert voices like Brian Hatton, an OKC friend and Associate with nearly 50 years’ experience in the finance and trust sector. From 2015 to 2022, Brian worked with a very large and successful charitable grant-making trust, donating to Irish charities, designing and executing a grant-giving programme from scratch and managing the grant-making and monitoring processes.
This month, we’re delighted to share Brian’s reflections on what makes individual and family philanthropy effective. Grounded in years of hands-on experience, his piece offers thoughtful, practical guidance for anyone seeking to give with intention and impact.
Why this matters for charities
It’s easy to think of donors as simply providers of funds, but the reality is that effective philanthropy requires as much strategic thinking, dedication and risk-taking as any successful business venture. For charities, understanding the mindset, processes and challenges on the funder side is vital - not only to build stronger, more aligned relationships, but to appreciate the complexity involved in giving well. As philanthropy in Ireland becomes more structured and impact-focused, it’s never been more important for charity leaders to understand what it really takes to give with intention and for maximum impact - and how charities can be part of that journey.
Introduction
It’s a privileged and rare position for any person to be in - however, fortunately for the world at large, there are individuals willing to commit substantial sums of money - and other valuable assets - to charitable and philanthropic causes. This is the domain of the philanthropist.
That said, assets alone aren’t enough to bring about meaningful and lasting change. To realise a philanthropist’s broader vision and make the most of available opportunities, there must be a clear and thorough plan - one that outlines method, implementation and measurement. At the same time, compassion, patience, and flexibility must remain at the heart of any charitable endeavour.
Every philanthropist’s circumstances and approach will be different, just as every plan will be unique. This article draws on my accumulated experience to highlight some key elements that are common to most philanthropic strategies and to help clarify and organise priorities.
First steps
Once the decision to act has been made - and the funding approach is broadly established - it’s worthwhile to document the key principles that will underpin the commitment. This might take the form of a mission statement or a high-level summary, which can serve as a touchstone for future decision-making. It should focus on guiding principles, such as:
Defining boundaries, for example:
Geographic focus (local, national, global)
Areas of interest (e.g. education, healthcare, the arts)
Demographics (e.g. children, older people, people with disabilities, minority groups)
Clarifying preferences, such as:
Public profile (high-profile vs. low-key giving)
Duration (perpetual, spend-down, or hybrid approach)
Outlining funding sources, such as:
One-off endowment
Annual top-ups
Company dividends
Ad hoc additions
Revenue from a social enterprise
Defining what success could look like - what outcomes or change the philanthropic commitment is ultimately seeking to achieve.
Consider what type of legal structure will best support the philanthropist’s objectives. Will grants be made directly from their own account, or would it be more appropriate to establish a separate entity such as a trust or a company limited by guarantee? Will that entity need to be registered as a charity? It’s also important to consider whether professional asset managers will be required, and what role other external advisors or technicians might play in supporting the work.
These high-level principles will shape more than just financial resources and structure - they will also influence the scale and type of human and operational resources required. Once the purpose, structure, and funding model are defined, attention can shift to the practical steps needed to bring the philanthropic vision to life.
Next steps
The human resources required will depend on who will lead and manage the project - and how. Will trustees and/or directors need to be identified and appointed? What staff will be necessary for core functions such as research, fact-finding, grantee liaison, public relations, reporting, follow-up and record-keeping? And what infrastructure - such as premises, equipment or systems - will they need to do this effectively?
Administrative costs are to be expected and should be proportionate to the size of the project, its modus operandi and the scale and nature of what is being undertaken.
It’s never too early to consider a succession plan, regardless of the size of the team. No one wants a project’s progress to stall due to staff turnover, so careful thought must be given to continuity. Where possible, building a team or shared leadership model can reduce reliance on any one individual, including the philanthropist. Creating and maintaining a clear set of procedures also provides a valuable roadmap for others to follow and helps ensure consistency over time.
What will the preferred decision-making mechanism be? The process behind each decision - whether it’s awarding a grant or taking another action - may be brief or extensive, depending on the level of information and engagement required. The persons involved in making that decision can vary from one individual to a committee. The degree of scrutiny should be proportionate to the size and scale of the commitment being considered.
Approaches will vary, but it’s worth remembering that, when it comes to decisiveness, small is often beautiful. This places emphasis on the quality of the people involved and the rigour of their work. Regardless of the structure chosen, adopting and documenting a clear and systematic process will deliver long-term benefits.
Creating a grant-giving programme
If cash grants are the chosen method of support, it’s important to consider what type of grants will best align with the philanthropist’s goals. Below are some thought-provoking questions to help shape that approach:
Should the focus be on smaller grants that support grassroots or early-stage organisations, or on larger donations aimed at enabling more ambitious outcomes?
Smaller grants often involve simple administration, while larger grants can foster deeper, longer-term partnerships with the right organisations.
Will grants be available by invitation only, through an open call to relevant sectors, or via a hybrid approach? Inviting proposals requires an upfront investment in research, while open calls are public and may lead to a steady stream of ad hoc requests. Each approach carries distinct and important resource implications that should be carefully considered.
Offering or availing of a matching grant can be a useful approach in the right circumstances.
For many potential grantees, the most valuable support comes in the form of unrestricted, multi-year funding. This allows them to plan with confidence - such as investing in specialist staff - and fosters the potential for a mutually rewarding, deeper and more strategic partnership between donor and donee. In the case of larger grants, a strong two-way relationship can lead to a valuable exchange of insights and data, keeping the donor well-informed not only about the donee’s direct work but also the broader context of its sector.
It’s unrealistic to expect that every donation or action will deliver the intended outcomes - however, that should be considered a risk worth taking. There are few certainties and a degree of risk-taking will be essential – too much analysis can lead to paralysis and a failure to act from an abundance of caution can’t really help anyone. The scale and significance of each grant will shape the next steps, but even underperformance offers valuable learning, and may highlight where alternative forms of support could be more effective.
How many organisations should be supported - a fixed number or an open-ended approach? The answer will depend in part on the typical size of donations and the overall impact being sought. A smaller number of more substantial grants will require greater investment in follow-up, dialogue and relationship management - with associated costs to consider. Conversely, distributing a larger number of smaller grants can increase administrative burden and risks diluting impact or causing ‘mission drift’.
How did we do?
It’s important to set aside time - at least once a year, in my view - to review the project’s achievements: to reflect on what’s working well, what’s not, and where there may be opportunities to improve. This includes evaluating both resources and procedures to identify efficiencies and address any weaknesses. Ongoing self-improvement should be part of the culture, though frequent or radical changes can lead to instability and confusion for both personnel and partners.
Success will look different for every philanthropic endeavour. What matters most is maintaining an open and inquisitive mindset - willing to evolve and adapt based on experience, while staying true to the core mission. And remembering there is always room to do better!
At OKC, we are passionate about enabling social transformation through philanthropy and providing values-led and impact-driven counsel for our clients - by connecting great people to great causes to enable great impact. You can read more about OKC’s philanthropy advisory services here.