Speaker 1: Welcome to Hod of Money. I'm Joel and I am Matt.
Speaker 2: And today we're talking about giving done Right with Phil Buchanan.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: So when it comes to being charitable and giving away money, Joel,
Speaker 4: I think it could be easy for us to dismiss
Speaker 4: our own efforts as just a tiny drop in the bucket,
Speaker 4: at least like on my part, uh huh, no foundations
Speaker 4: in my name, I'm selling hardcore right now. Like I'm
Speaker 4: thinking for a lot of folks out there, maybe you
Speaker 4: know you're giving just when prompted at the checkout register, right,
Speaker 4: so it's just like five bucks on occasion, or maybe
Speaker 4: you actually are being a little more disciplined about it, right,
Speaker 4: you give away a certain percentage of your income, you
Speaker 4: cut a check every single month. Maybe that's the easy
Speaker 4: part you give, but then you don't think about it
Speaker 4: beyond that. But that is not how we approach things
Speaker 4: here at How to Money, we want you to get
Speaker 4: the most bang for your buck, and here to help
Speaker 4: us to learn how to do that is Phil Buchanan.
Speaker 4: He is the president of the Center for Effective Philanthropy.
Speaker 4: He's also the author of the book Giving Done Right,
Speaker 4: where he emphasizes the importance of thoughtful and mission driven giving.
Speaker 4: He is all about providing data driven insights to help
Speaker 4: us to maximize our impact out there in the world. So, Phil,
Speaker 4: thank you so much for taking the time and to
Speaker 4: talk with Joel and I today.
Speaker 3: Thanks Matt and Joel really happy to be here.
Speaker 1: We're glad to have you Phil.
Speaker 2: The first question we ask everyone that comes on the
Speaker 2: show is what do you like to sporgehn Matt and
Speaker 2: I we spend a lot on craft beer, but hey,
Speaker 2: it's okay because we're doing the smart thing with our
Speaker 2: money at the same time, saving and investing for our future.
Speaker 1: What's that spurge for you?
Speaker 3: I'm going to take two if that's okay.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah.
Speaker 3: One is concert tickets, live music. I love to see
Speaker 3: shows and I sometimes spend too much on tickets. And
Speaker 3: the other is I try to push myself to quote
Speaker 3: unquote splurge fill only that is to give a little
Speaker 3: bit more than might feel comfortable to organizations that I
Speaker 3: really really care about. I don't know if that counts
Speaker 3: as a splurge, but I know the first one does.
Speaker 4: Very on mission, I should say to educated. I'm curious too, Phil,
Speaker 4: who have you seen recently? What was the best concert
Speaker 4: in reason memory.
Speaker 3: So a lot of my musical tastes these days are
Speaker 3: influenced by my nineteen year old and twenty three year
Speaker 3: old daughters. So this summer I saw Noah Khan with
Speaker 3: my nineteen year old, which was fantastic, nice, and just
Speaker 3: recently my twenty three year old kind of dragged me,
Speaker 3: and then I ended up having a great time to
Speaker 3: see The Far Side, a maybe somewhat obscure nineties hip
Speaker 3: hop act who were amazing actually, And then actually a
Speaker 3: few nights after that, we went my wife and I
Speaker 3: went also with my older daughter to see Dar william
Speaker 3: who's folks.
Speaker 1: I loved Dar Williams.
Speaker 3: She's a great songwriter, brilliant. We went to college together,
Speaker 3: although I didn't know her.
Speaker 1: Oh that's cool.
Speaker 3: We've been seeing her shows for you know, the last
Speaker 3: twenty years. So lots of different types of music.
Speaker 1: Cool, Okay, yeah, that sounds very eclectic.
Speaker 4: Phil just like scored so many more points with the
Speaker 4: younger listeners than.
Speaker 1: Oh, can I ask one quick question you Pheel?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we can talk about music for a
Speaker 2: long time, But I want to know the title of
Speaker 2: your book is giving done right? I'm curious I just
Speaker 2: kind of want to start this episode off by asking
Speaker 2: the inverse question, what's giving done wrong?
Speaker 3: Giving done wrong is thoughtless, arrogant, top down giving giving
Speaker 3: that constrains organizations from being successful or effective. And there's
Speaker 3: a whole lot of it. So I'll give you one example.
Speaker 3: A lot of folks fixate, and I understand why on
Speaker 3: overhead rates of nonprofits. So they'll say how much is
Speaker 3: going to the cause or the program and how much
Speaker 3: is going to quote unquote overhead, And that gets defined
Speaker 3: in different ways, And I like to back people up
Speaker 3: and say, what do you really mean? So if you're
Speaker 3: talking about supporting the food pantry that's serving hungry people,
Speaker 3: are you saying that you want your gift to go
Speaker 3: to pay for the chicken and the broccoli and the
Speaker 3: other food that's served, but not the rent of the
Speaker 3: establishment in which the food is served, or the salaries
Speaker 3: of the staff who coordinate the volunteers to serve the food.
Speaker 3: Because that makes no sense. And if you restrict your
Speaker 3: giving in that way, you will constrain the ability of
Speaker 3: nonprofits to be effective. Similarly, if you think you have
Speaker 3: all the answers to what are the most pressing problems
Speaker 3: or the ways to solve them rather than going in
Speaker 3: more from a place of humility, will make the kind
Speaker 3: of mistakes that we sometimes see billionaire philanthropists make, and
Speaker 3: so that would be philanthropy done wrong or giving done wrong.
Speaker 4: I could say that being an instance of being cheap
Speaker 4: as opposed to more of a frugal approach and looking
Speaker 4: at the overall impact phil Can you talk about like
Speaker 4: America has an interesting philanthropy history. I think that differs
Speaker 4: from the rest of the world. Can you explain why
Speaker 4: that is?
Speaker 3: Sure? I mean, I think that the founding of the
Speaker 3: country was rooted in a desire for religious freedom. And
Speaker 3: you know, freedom of association obviously is built right into
Speaker 3: our Bill of Rights. And in the you know, early days,
Speaker 3: Totokeville discussed about discussed Americans tendency to form, you know,
Speaker 3: associations and groups of all types and and so there's
Speaker 3: this sense of the autonomy to kind of organize around
Speaker 3: the issues that you care about, the freedom to do that,
Speaker 3: the importance of doing that. And then in I believe
Speaker 3: it was nineteen seventeen, the charitable tax deduction became a
Speaker 3: part of the tax code. So there was then an
Speaker 3: incentive to give philanthropically, just as we give incentives for people,
Speaker 3: for example, to buy homes. The notion was we want
Speaker 3: to encourage giving. And so the US has one of
Speaker 3: the highest rates of giving globally. As a percent of
Speaker 3: GDP giving in twenty twenty three was five hundred and
Speaker 3: fifty billion dollars charitable giving, and the bulk of that
Speaker 3: three hundred and seventy four billion was giving buy individuals.
Speaker 3: And well, we think of the ultra wealthy, and there
Speaker 3: are some concerning trends in terms of everyday givers giving
Speaker 3: at lower rates than was true twenty years ago, and
Speaker 3: we can talk about that. It is still also the
Speaker 3: case that the bulk of giving to most nonprofits is
Speaker 3: not accounted for or not rather done by the biggest givers.
Speaker 3: It is everyday givers who are helping fuel local nonprofits
Speaker 3: in every community, who are working on important issues and
Speaker 3: often helping the most vulnerable among us. So it is
Speaker 3: an integral part of what keeps our country going. And
Speaker 3: there's lots to be worried about in terms of the
Speaker 3: strength of the nonprofit sector, the sort of trends related
Speaker 3: to philanthropy, but historically it has been a great strength
Speaker 3: of this country the nonprofit sector supported by generous donors.
Speaker 2: Can you give us like an overview maybe or kind
Speaker 2: of going into some US history a little bit here,
Speaker 2: which is really cool, maybe of the actual good. What
Speaker 2: are some of the things that nonprofits have had the
Speaker 2: most impact on in this country in your opinion.
Speaker 3: There's so much all around us that we take for
Speaker 3: granted that is the work of nonprofits supported by generous donors.
Speaker 3: So in the wake of the pandemic, you know, we
Speaker 3: all rediscovered the trails.
Speaker 1: In our very area.
Speaker 3: You know, all the land conservation, the beautiful places that
Speaker 3: we get to enjoy that are all around us. That's
Speaker 3: an example of something we don't necessarily think about how
Speaker 3: that came to be, that we've got that great path
Speaker 3: to run on. But there's a philanthropy story there. The
Speaker 3: diseases that we don't have to worry about our kids
Speaker 3: dying from, you know, the Rockefeller Foundation developing a vaccine
Speaker 3: in the nineteen thirties for yellow fever. That's not something
Speaker 3: you find most people worrying about anymore. You think about
Speaker 3: medical education and medical schools and way in which philanthropy
Speaker 3: played a role in their development and establishment. I mean,
Speaker 3: there's a philanthropic, you know, story for almost everything we
Speaker 3: think about basic you know, civil rights and some of
Speaker 3: which are are under attack again, their right to vote,
Speaker 3: and the role that nonprofits supported by foundations and other
Speaker 3: donors played in helping to make that happen. You think
Speaker 3: about the progress that's made been made in terms of
Speaker 3: criminal justice reform and the rates of incarceration. I mean,
Speaker 3: there's much more progress to be made, but the progress
Speaker 3: that's been made and things like the disproportionate rates of
Speaker 3: incarceration of black men in this country, the progress that
Speaker 3: has been made has been a result of amazing nonprofits
Speaker 3: like Equal Justice Initiative supported by generous donors, Clean air,
Speaker 3: clean water. These are the result as of environmental advocacy
Speaker 3: to try to get companies to curb their their pollutants
Speaker 3: or to get government to regulate certain activities, and that
Speaker 3: have been successful and that have led to again cleaner
Speaker 3: air and cleaner water than we would have had. The
Speaker 3: list just goes on and on. Museums, arts and.
Speaker 1: CULTURELD would be bleaker is what You're a.
Speaker 3: Solutely bleaker the art that we enjoy, you know, I'll stop.
Speaker 4: No, I mean, regardless of anyone listening could identify with
Speaker 4: some of the different acts you mentioned. We can all
Speaker 4: get behind clean water and clean air.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and just to think that, I think you put
Speaker 2: it in perspective really well there that there's a lot
Speaker 2: of things that we enjoy that we have a hard
Speaker 2: time pinpointing where they came from. And to see that
Speaker 2: nonprofits had an active role in the society we live in,
Speaker 2: it just, I don't know, brings a smile on my face.
Speaker 2: Makes me happy that they exist and that there's nonprofits
Speaker 2: doing great work out there, even if their nonprofits I
Speaker 2: don't know about that's that's.
Speaker 4: True, but if you trace it back and dive into
Speaker 4: the history, oftentimes you probably can tie that to charitable
Speaker 4: organizations phil So you kind of hinted at the fact
Speaker 4: that philanthropy, how it's been declining in recent years. Maybe
Speaker 4: shed some light there, like why has that been a
Speaker 4: trend that we've been seeing recently.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's hard to know exactly why, and I think
Speaker 3: that what I've learned over the years is maybe blindingly obvious.
Speaker 3: But the answer to most questions, you know, when we're
Speaker 3: looking for why is it's a combo platter of reasons.
Speaker 3: But just to start with the problem two decades ago,
Speaker 3: and this data comes from the Lily School at Indiana University,
Speaker 3: about two thirds of American households we're giving to charity.
Speaker 3: The most recent data it's just under half. So the
Speaker 3: rates of giving have declined for a while that I
Speaker 3: wasn't maybe seen as the crisis. It is because there
Speaker 3: was so much wealth creation that the sort of mega
Speaker 3: givers were able to fuel an increase in overall giving.
Speaker 3: That in a way mass the problem of a decline
Speaker 3: in the rate of participation. But now we're seeing that
Speaker 3: flattening out to particularly when you adjust for the inflation
Speaker 3: that has occurred in the last couple of years. So
Speaker 3: we've actually seen year over year declines in giving, which
Speaker 3: is not something that we're used to and which has
Speaker 3: real consequences for vital nonprofits. So to your question why
Speaker 3: there's so many possible contributors, one I think is just
Speaker 3: to decline in trust and institutions broadly in our society,
Speaker 3: more cynicism, you know, polarization rite a sense that a
Speaker 3: sense of distrust in institutions. Essentially, I think that there's
Speaker 3: also there's a lot of religion and religiously affiliated giving,
Speaker 3: and because there's been a decline in religious participation that
Speaker 3: has probably played a role. Folks point to some of
Speaker 3: the impacts on the middle class of the Great Recession,
Speaker 3: even as long ago as it was that that you know,
Speaker 3: played a role fifteen years ago, I guess now in
Speaker 3: some decline in rates of charitable giving. My own sense
Speaker 3: is also that is a society we have not sufficiently
Speaker 3: paid attention to the accomplishments of nonprofits. There's a tendency
Speaker 3: to see nonprofits as lesser than to not think about them,
Speaker 3: as we were just discussing, or when we do, to
Speaker 3: imagine that they might be staffed by people who you know,
Speaker 3: couldn't quite make it in the business world or something,
Speaker 3: when in fact, my view is that it takes everything
Speaker 3: to run a nonprofit that it takes to run an
Speaker 3: equivalent side business, and a lot more. It's a harder job,
Speaker 3: and nonprofit staff are often some of the most talented
Speaker 3: in the country. But I don't know that that story
Speaker 3: has been told, and that there's been a tendency instead
Speaker 3: to focus on the isolated scandals or controversies which are
Speaker 3: real and should be you know, should be addressed, but
Speaker 3: people generalize them and assume that there are widespread problems
Speaker 3: in management or leadership of nonprofits when when that's just
Speaker 3: not the case. So I think it's it's so many
Speaker 3: different things. And I would then turn around and point
Speaker 3: the finger at myself and those of us in the
Speaker 3: in the nonprofit sector who've made careers of this work
Speaker 3: and say we have not figured out how to tell
Speaker 3: the story well enough. And so I think part of
Speaker 3: the part of the blame lies there as well.
Speaker 2: Well, it's interesting you're talking about people who work in nonprofits.
Speaker 2: I think a lot of times you're right, they're just
Speaker 2: as talented, and they often choose on purpose to get
Speaker 2: paid less absolutely able to do work that they feel
Speaker 2: makes more of a difference than going out there into
Speaker 2: generalized corporate America. Not there's anything wrong with that, but
Speaker 2: I think that they're like, yeah, those people are taking
Speaker 2: a significant pay cut off them to do work that
Speaker 2: they think needs to exist in this world. I'm curious
Speaker 2: to what about taxes, how do those impact how people
Speaker 2: give and how much people give? Because like the tax
Speaker 2: cuts and Job Act, in many ways it had some
Speaker 2: significantly positive impacts or other potentially negative impacts, But how
Speaker 2: has that impacted giving and the higher standard deduction just
Speaker 2: means that a lot fewer people gets a tax benefit
Speaker 2: from their donations.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that's probably on the list of contributors
Speaker 3: as well, although I mean that's some more recent development.
Speaker 3: And I think as I'm not a policy person, I'm
Speaker 3: certainly not a tax policy person, but I would say
Speaker 3: that it doesn't make a lot of sense to me
Speaker 3: that it is only the wealthiest, right the itemers, who
Speaker 3: we would give an incentive to give. Right. So, so
Speaker 3: I'd like to see universal uh deductibility of charitable gifts
Speaker 3: in our in our tax policy, so that so that
Speaker 3: folks who are you know, everyday people uh making you know,
Speaker 3: regular wages also get also get that level of incentive
Speaker 3: for for charitable giving. So I think it's an issue,
Speaker 3: and and you know what, I honestly think it's one
Speaker 3: of those issues that people should be able to come
Speaker 3: together on across the partisan divide. I'm not sure that
Speaker 3: I have a lot of hope right now about people
Speaker 3: coming together across the partisan divide on much of anything,
Speaker 3: but but this shure should be one area where you
Speaker 3: can imagine some some agreement.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: So we've we've talked about effective altruism on the show
Speaker 4: before a lot of folks know about that. How would
Speaker 4: you say that effect to valtruism is different from effective philanthropy.
Speaker 4: Could you talk about maybe some of the differences, some
Speaker 4: of the compare and contrast.
Speaker 3: To Sure, Yeah, I would sort of describe effective altruism.
Speaker 3: And you guys tell me if you see it differently,
Speaker 3: because I think it's shifted a little bit. What what
Speaker 3: what what people? How people define it? But as this
Speaker 3: notion that you should be sort of maximizing the impact
Speaker 3: on human lives of your charitable giving and that that
Speaker 3: that's a that's your moral obligation. And Peter Singer, the
Speaker 3: philosopher at Princeton, I think, is sort of the godfather
Speaker 3: of this concept. And I think it's a helpful challenge
Speaker 3: to one's thinking to say, Okay, maybe I should give
Speaker 3: some of my charitable donations to parts of the world
Speaker 3: where the dollar is going to go further and where
Speaker 3: I could say, prevent a death from malaria potentially for
Speaker 3: not that much money, or you know, seriously affect the
Speaker 3: trajectory of someone's life. And I think that's sort of
Speaker 3: a useful intellectual challenge. I think as a practical matter,
Speaker 3: though effective altruism doesn't really work as a defining sort
Speaker 3: of framework for most people. And that's because if taken literally,
Speaker 3: if applied literally, it would mean you wouldn't give to
Speaker 3: the arts, for example. It would mean that you wouldn't
Speaker 3: give locally in your own community if you live, for example,
Speaker 3: in the United States. And so I am skeptical of
Speaker 3: its utility as a practical framework to actually guide people,
Speaker 3: because I think the reality is that philanthropy is rooted
Speaker 3: in our values and our sense of connection to other
Speaker 3: human beings, and so well we need to apply our
Speaker 3: analytic minds to it, we also need to use our hearts,
Speaker 3: and that the two go together. And so I think
Speaker 3: of effective philanthropy as something that allows for more diversity
Speaker 3: in choice of goals based on people's values and interests. Right, So,
Speaker 3: I think, you know, the goals that you guys would
Speaker 3: choose might not be the goals that I would choose.
Speaker 3: And I don't think one set of choices is necessarily
Speaker 3: objectively better than another. I think the sort of pluralism
Speaker 3: of philanthropy, the choice that people have, is a strength. Then,
Speaker 3: but I do think you should have clear goals. You
Speaker 3: should try to know what you're doing and make sure
Speaker 3: that you're giving is consistent with those goals. You should
Speaker 3: try to then give in a way that supports effective
Speaker 3: strategies to achieve those goals. If you want to work
Speaker 3: on a particular issue, whatever it might be, there are
Speaker 3: more and less effective paths to follow, often more and
Speaker 3: less effective organizations to support. So I think that's important
Speaker 3: to pay attention to. And then I think it's important
Speaker 3: to have information that you're looking at to gauge your
Speaker 3: sense of whether the folks you're supporting are are in
Speaker 3: fact making the difference that they intend to make. Are
Speaker 3: they as effective as as you thought they were when
Speaker 3: you made those gifts. Those are important questions to ask,
Speaker 3: But we got to keep the heart and values center
Speaker 3: to this as well.
Speaker 4: I think I like how you mentioned hearts there and
Speaker 4: you said objective truth. It's almost like the difference between
Speaker 4: more of an object of approach to charity and a
Speaker 4: subjective approach, right, It's like, are we talking about some
Speaker 4: sort of absolute impact that these dollars are going to
Speaker 4: have on individuals or maybe the relative impact relative to
Speaker 4: who relative to you?
Speaker 1: And as you know, you can see in front of
Speaker 1: your eyes, Yeah, and.
Speaker 4: As you know, like I mean, this is a personal
Speaker 4: finance show, and so much of kind of the decisions
Speaker 4: that we make do have to do with personal preference.
Speaker 4: So I like how you distinguished the two there.
Speaker 2: I want to ask specifically about you talked about the
Speaker 2: fixation on overhead, and that's something Matt and I've talked
Speaker 2: about on the show before too, and maybe we should
Speaker 2: probably think a little differently about that. This conversation is
Speaker 2: making me want to think about what other things a
Speaker 2: nonprofit might be doing, and not just thinking about how
Speaker 2: efficient are they, but what are some of the best
Speaker 2: resources for finding the most effective charities? And how do
Speaker 2: you judge whether or not a charity is effective?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean those are really difficult questions because there's
Speaker 3: not like a universal metric by which we can compare
Speaker 3: the organization and working to improve graduation rates in Cleveland
Speaker 3: against the organization working to reduce CO two emissions, you know,
Speaker 3: in Brazil. The metrics are different, and so that's why
Speaker 3: I think people gravitate toward overhead because it is something
Speaker 3: you can compare different organizations using the same ratios. But
Speaker 3: that doesn't mean that you should look I think it's
Speaker 3: reasonable to say, well, what does this organization's budget look like,
Speaker 3: how are they allocating it? You know, I think it's
Speaker 3: reasonable if two organizations are doing essentially the same thing
Speaker 3: to look at the budget relative to the amount of
Speaker 3: that thing that they're doing. Although it's relatively rare, you're
Speaker 3: going to find that apple to apple kind of comparison.
Speaker 3: But honestly, what I would ask is what is the
Speaker 3: organization trying to do? It comes back to what I
Speaker 3: was saying before. What are their goals, what are their
Speaker 3: strategies for achieving those goals? And what indicators are they
Speaker 3: using to assess progress? Can they tell you a story
Speaker 3: that makes sense that answers those basic questions. If they can,
Speaker 3: then they're in the best position to decide how to
Speaker 3: allocate your gift. And if they're investing in something that
Speaker 3: some might categorize as overhead, like increasing staff salaries so
Speaker 3: they can retain the best people because they're having trouble
Speaker 3: retaining their frontline employees or making technological improvements that will
Speaker 3: help them do their work more effectively, do we really
Speaker 3: want to disincentivize them for doing that? And if we
Speaker 3: don't trust the leaders of organizations enough to be able
Speaker 3: to make those judgments about how to allocate resources within
Speaker 3: their budgets to pursue the mission that they're dedicated to.
Speaker 3: Then why are we funding them at all? And then
Speaker 3: in terms of your question about well, where do you
Speaker 3: go to figure this out? I'm not a huge fan
Speaker 3: of some of the popular sort of charity rating websites
Speaker 3: because they do tend to be too focused on these
Speaker 3: financial ratios, which I think are not helpful out of context,
Speaker 3: and which rightly varied based on the kind of work
Speaker 3: that are being done, and then people apply them without
Speaker 3: that context or nuance. So where do you go? I
Speaker 3: think your local community foundation is a great place to start.
Speaker 3: So almost every community in this country has a community
Speaker 3: foundation that exists to match donors and nonprofits in that community.
Speaker 3: I think there are this might be an outdated number now,
Speaker 3: but at least eight hundred community foundations in this country,
Speaker 3: and there's a community foundation finder online I believe, on
Speaker 3: the Council on Foundation's website. You can go find your
Speaker 3: community foundation and they can help you align your priorities
Speaker 3: with organizations in your community that they have vetted and
Speaker 3: know to be effective working in those areas that matter
Speaker 3: to you. So that that's very cool the best advice
Speaker 3: I can give. No.
Speaker 4: I think that's a helpful context to put it in,
Speaker 4: because when you are looking at certain metrics like expense overhead,
Speaker 4: like it's almost like a race to the bottom if
Speaker 4: that's the only price that you're looking at, at which point,
Speaker 4: maybe there are different sacrifices, not sacrifices, but decisions that
Speaker 4: some of these nonprofits make.
Speaker 2: And at some point, why don't we just put up
Speaker 2: red box machines with foods to feed the homeless? You
Speaker 2: know what I'm saying, Like, there's no then there's no
Speaker 2: personal touch, and so I get I get why that's
Speaker 2: a faulty metric. So we've got so much more that
Speaker 2: we want to discuss with you, Phil, including Okay, well,
Speaker 2: then how do we come up with effective goals and
Speaker 2: strategies to be wise givers. We'll get to a bunch
Speaker 2: more with Phil Buchanan right after this we are back from.
Speaker 4: The break talking about giving done right with Phil If
Speaker 4: Buchanan and Phil, you just mentioned how we should be
Speaker 4: looking to different local community foundations, and a large part
Speaker 4: of that too, when you're looking to organizations that are
Speaker 4: geographically close to you, is the ability to even volunteer
Speaker 4: in person totally. How important do you think that support is,
Speaker 4: that non financial support to some of the different nonprofits
Speaker 4: that we care about.
Speaker 3: I mean, to many nonprofits, it's absolutely vital that they
Speaker 3: literally couldn't deliver their programmatic work without volunteers. It obviously
Speaker 3: varies nonprofit and nonprofit depending on what the organization is doing,
Speaker 3: but volunteering, as you say, can be a great way
Speaker 3: also to just get educated about both the particular nonprofit
Speaker 3: and just the nature of the work. And it's super fun.
Speaker 3: I mean, one of the things that is interesting. And
Speaker 3: this is not like research that we've done, but I've
Speaker 3: read research by a variety of folks, including people at
Speaker 3: Notre Dame, who have studied the effects on the human
Speaker 3: brain of giving and volunteering. It literally will make you
Speaker 3: happier if you get out there and give both of
Speaker 3: your time and your money. And like I said, a
Speaker 3: lot of nonprofits are really dependent on that volunteer support.
Speaker 2: What about someone who's listening and says, but doesn't the
Speaker 2: government fund a lot of some of these causes? Aren't
Speaker 2: they trying to tackle some of the same missions that
Speaker 2: nonprofits are trying to tackle. How do you think about
Speaker 2: the nonprofit response to certain issues versus government involvement, and
Speaker 2: are they working in tandem or is this a cause
Speaker 2: for some people to sit on their hands and not give.
Speaker 3: First of all, a lot of nonprofits do get government
Speaker 3: funding in the form of contracts of various kinds, right,
Speaker 3: So the government is often looking to nonprofits to do
Speaker 3: certain kinds of work. I'll give you an example. I'm
Speaker 3: on the board of directors at the National Council on Aging,
Speaker 3: which worry about the quality of life of older adults,
Speaker 3: and the National Council on an Aging gets federal funding
Speaker 3: for programs that they then grant out to local senior
Speaker 3: centers in communities that provide various services like education on
Speaker 3: falls prevention, for example, or job training for older adults
Speaker 3: who want to get back in the workforce. So we
Speaker 3: sometimes think of government and nonprofit as more separate than
Speaker 3: they are in the sense that nonprofits are often contracted
Speaker 3: to do work with federal funds. I mean, I do
Speaker 3: think that in other countries that have a more robust
Speaker 3: social safety net, there is less of a need for
Speaker 3: certain kinds of nonprofits. And there's been a lot of
Speaker 3: critique of philanthropy and nonprofits from folks sort of on
Speaker 3: the ideological left. Let's say, who will argue, well, this
Speaker 3: should be the government's work and the billionaires should just
Speaker 3: pay their taxes. And you know, that sounds kind of
Speaker 3: convincing until you think it through and realize that actually,
Speaker 3: you know, the American people have voted for the folks
Speaker 3: who are who are making these decisions in this country,
Speaker 3: and we have I might, I might like a different outcome.
Speaker 3: I would like a different outcome, but the fact is
Speaker 3: we have not. We have not elected to have that
Speaker 3: kind of social safety net in this country. We literally
Speaker 3: have not elected the people who want to put that
Speaker 3: into place. And so in the meantime, yes, we could
Speaker 3: focus on advocacy to try to get that to happen
Speaker 3: so that the government does more. That's totally legitimate, and
Speaker 3: you can do some of that legitimate, legitimately philanthropically. In
Speaker 3: the meantime, there are needs that have to be at
Speaker 3: every day. So it's too easy to just kick back
Speaker 3: and say, well, the government should do this, because some
Speaker 3: of it the government just isn't doing. And so, if
Speaker 3: we care about our fellow citizens, if we care about
Speaker 3: the most marginalized among us, if we care about our neighbors.
Speaker 3: Then philanthropy matters.
Speaker 2: Like ideal is immerse reality on the ground, I think so.
Speaker 4: Yeah, one of the ways you've addressed our ability to
Speaker 4: assess different nonprofits, like you mentioned the head and the Heart. Yeah,
Speaker 4: I'm also thinking about just some of the different trends
Speaker 4: that we've seen within like the giving space, Like there
Speaker 4: are different organizations that just get really popular for one
Speaker 4: reason or the other. And something else that keeps ringing
Speaker 4: in my head that you said earlier is that an
Speaker 4: organization has an ability to tell a story. And so
Speaker 4: are there some organizations that just get lucky with how
Speaker 4: it is that they're able to communicate the needs that
Speaker 4: they're looking to address to the American public.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, I think what you're saying is so
Speaker 3: important because sometimes we confuse what sounds like it would
Speaker 3: work with what works, and we give on the basis
Speaker 3: of something sounding like it would work. So an example,
Speaker 3: this is an older one, but you know program called
Speaker 3: Scared Straight where the goal was to encourage high school
Speaker 3: students not to get involved in criminal activity, and the
Speaker 3: intervention was to have formally incarcerated people come speak at
Speaker 3: school assemblies about the mistakes that they'd made. In their life,
Speaker 3: and that program got a lot of funding when it
Speaker 3: was like it would work. It sounds like it would work, right,
Speaker 3: Like you see, well, I wouldn't want to be like
Speaker 3: that guy and have spent seven years in prison. Well,
Speaker 3: when it was rigorously evaluated, multiple studies discovered is that
Speaker 3: it had the opposite of the intended effect. It made
Speaker 3: young people more interested in crime rather than less.
Speaker 1: It was really cool, exactly, No, that's exactly it.
Speaker 3: And so that would be an example in sort of
Speaker 3: a negative direction. I'll give you an example on the
Speaker 3: other side. I think for decades people have assumed that
Speaker 3: you can't just give money to poor people to help
Speaker 3: them get out of poverty, because it won't be sustainable,
Speaker 3: they won't make the right choices any number of reasons.
Speaker 3: But there's increasing evidence that organizations like Give Directly, which
Speaker 3: is international cash transfers to people in poverty and up
Speaker 3: together here in the United States, which is a similar model,
Speaker 3: where folks are literally being identified as in need and
Speaker 3: able to benefit from direct cash transfers and they're receiving
Speaker 3: that cash, and the evaluations that have been done suggest
Speaker 3: that it does change the trajectory of their life. It
Speaker 3: certainly changes the quality of their life in the near
Speaker 3: term while they're receiving the money, but then also allowing
Speaker 3: them to get on a different trajectory, whether that's by
Speaker 3: pursuing educational opportunities that they might not have otherwise been
Speaker 3: able to or retiring debt. There's another amazing organization called
Speaker 3: called Rip Medical Debt, and you know, they're literally paying
Speaker 3: off people's medical debt.
Speaker 1: Didn't they just change their name to Yes? I'm worried
Speaker 1: trying to remember what the new.
Speaker 3: Name as I say this, Yeah, but formerly known as
Speaker 3: RIP Medical Debt. I'm sure if you google it the
Speaker 3: new name will come up. And you know, just as
Speaker 3: simple as as helping people get that, you know, off
Speaker 3: their back is transformative. But it is the kind of
Speaker 3: thing that, you know, there's this kind of paternalistic sense
Speaker 3: that people sometimes have of well, but that person won't
Speaker 3: make the right decision and you know, won't use the
Speaker 3: money the way the way that I would. But actually
Speaker 3: people are smart about their own lives, you know, and
Speaker 3: people are in a good position to know what they need.
Speaker 3: And one of the things I'd like to see more
Speaker 3: of in philanthropy is trust. Trust in the people in
Speaker 3: communities who know what they need, trust in the nonprofits
Speaker 3: that are working in those communities, that know how to
Speaker 3: do the work, and a little bit less of the
Speaker 3: assumption that I often see from you know, like the
Speaker 3: tech billionaires, that because I was really good at that,
Speaker 3: I'm going to be really good at being a philanthropist,
Speaker 3: when in fact it's kind of a different set of skills.
Speaker 3: There's a lot of knowledge already out there, and it
Speaker 3: takes it takes sort of commitment and humility to really
Speaker 3: get good at being at being a philanthropist.
Speaker 2: Yeah, by the way, the new name of RIP Medical
Speaker 2: Debt is Undoe Medical Debt, so thank you. I don't
Speaker 2: know why they changed the name, but they've been around
Speaker 2: a long time now, and yeah, that's what the rest.
Speaker 4: I wonder if the RIP was just a little too
Speaker 4: slightly negative, maybe they're just like this is a little
Speaker 4: too much like the Scared Streak.
Speaker 2: They really were like acting and killing medical Debt and
Speaker 2: they still are. But I like that. I like the
Speaker 2: old name. But what's fine too, and they're just a
Speaker 2: great organization with that.
Speaker 1: I love what they're doing. Phil.
Speaker 2: I'm curious you talk about not giving just because you
Speaker 2: were asked to give and That is kind of one
Speaker 2: of my pet peeves, and this time of year, I
Speaker 2: think it's especially It may be claws on your heartstrings.
Speaker 2: You're walking into the grocery store and someone's raising money
Speaker 2: for a particular nonprofit. And sometimes I have no problem
Speaker 2: with people who want to give in that way. I
Speaker 2: feel like a scrooge because I'm saying no. But I
Speaker 2: have plans for my giving, and so that's the reason
Speaker 2: I'm saying no. In the moment, you talk about giving
Speaker 2: in accordance with your goals and your strategies. Can you
Speaker 2: kind of elaborate on that and how you see the
Speaker 2: dichotomy I guess between being asked maybe in a moment
Speaker 2: of emotional vulnerability, and having a pre thought plan for
Speaker 2: how and when you're going to give.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Right, there's a crowd of nine people behind you.
Speaker 3: It's the holidays. You're in the store, and the cash
Speaker 3: here says loudly, do you want to give two dollars
Speaker 3: and fifty cents to help end cancer? And you're like, oh,
Speaker 3: do I want to be the guy the guy saying
Speaker 3: no to that question right now? But you actually don't
Speaker 3: know anything about where that money is going, and you're
Speaker 3: not thinking about what your priorities are in that moment,
Speaker 3: and maybe you do want to give to organizations working
Speaker 3: to end cancer. Maybe that's really really important to you.
Speaker 2: And if you say no, it doesn't mean you love
Speaker 2: cancer or anything either, right, but I think that's how
Speaker 2: it makes you feel, exactly.
Speaker 3: Do it in your dining room out, do a little research.
Speaker 3: Maybe there are maybe there are certain organizations that are
Speaker 3: more compelling to you than others. Don't just respond in
Speaker 3: that moment. And it's hard, but I think you can say,
Speaker 3: oh no, you know, I really believe in that, but
Speaker 3: I actually do you know my charitable giving, you know,
Speaker 3: at the end of the year, and I have organizations
Speaker 3: I give to or whatever, you know, not like the
Speaker 3: person at the cash er is just probably needs to
Speaker 3: hear all that. But I think if it's.
Speaker 2: Helpful for me to know my strategy giving plan.
Speaker 3: Yeah exactly. But I just think if you just respond,
Speaker 3: you will look back and say, Okay, I spent all
Speaker 3: this money, but it wasn't on my priorities. It was
Speaker 3: just saying yes to people. And so you know, what
Speaker 3: I say in the book is, look, you're not going
Speaker 3: to be able to one hundred percent, you know, do
Speaker 3: this when your niece says, I'm raising money for the
Speaker 3: school project and it's this organization you know that does
Speaker 3: X y Z. Like you're gonna help your niece with
Speaker 3: her project, right, she's supposed to raise X amount of money.
Speaker 3: Or your friend is doing a bike race or a run,
Speaker 3: that's fine, but just try to limit that budget it
Speaker 3: make it twenty percent for the stuff that you're going
Speaker 3: to just have to be responsive to because it's your
Speaker 3: niece or your friend, and then make the eighty percent
Speaker 3: align with your priorities. And I think, you know, I
Speaker 3: mean I made that up right. There's no magic to that,
Speaker 3: but I mean it's it's something to provide a little
Speaker 3: bit of guidance and clarity, and you can even explain
Speaker 3: to folks like, you know, I have these charitable priorities,
Speaker 3: like like I was saying before, and and I just
Speaker 3: got to protect my ability to pursue those.
Speaker 2: I think it's possible this time of year too that
Speaker 2: some people and I don't want to cast dispersions, but
Speaker 2: it's just true when you look at the news and
Speaker 2: you see reports of people who are trying to collect
Speaker 2: money for charities they don't exist. So there are scams
Speaker 2: out there as well that people need to be aware
Speaker 2: of and maybe not even some nonprofits aren't scams, but
Speaker 2: they are I don't know, I would call them maybe
Speaker 2: scam adjacent. We've talked about on the show different even
Speaker 2: professional athletes phil who start their own nonprofit and when
Speaker 2: you look at the numbers, like it's not about like
Speaker 2: high overhead, it's about pathetic results. And just some of
Speaker 2: these nonprofits they've got a fantastic figurehead at the top,
Speaker 2: the celebrity or something like that, but they're really they're
Speaker 2: they've employed their best friend or something like that, and
Speaker 2: they have a multi six figure salary. Like this nonprofit
Speaker 2: is doing almost nothing, but it's it's gaining a lot
Speaker 2: of acoleates because of the people that are attached to it.
Speaker 2: How can we protect ourselves maybe from the worst kinds
Speaker 2: of charities out there?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean I think I think first of all,
Speaker 3: by not saying yes in the moment whatever the whatever
Speaker 3: the moment is, whether it's the cash register, the phone call,
Speaker 3: the person in front of you, but then also seeing
Speaker 3: seeing who else supports them, like if you are interested, Okay, well,
Speaker 3: let me see. I mentioned community foundations before, like community
Speaker 3: foundations have staff who do a level of vetting that
Speaker 3: makes it, you know, somewhat less likely that you know,
Speaker 3: if they're giving a major grant to that organization, that
Speaker 3: that it's that it's problematic. Other staffed private foundations similar situation,
Speaker 3: you're going to know that they've been through some kind
Speaker 3: of real selection process. And and you know, I mean
Speaker 3: I try to be like nuanced about this, Like I've said, like,
Speaker 3: don't fixate on overhead metrics, and I believe that, but
Speaker 3: at the extremes they can be relevant, right, Like if
Speaker 3: in fact, the bulk of money is going to fundraising
Speaker 3: expense by some you know, third party corporate fundraiser. You know,
Speaker 3: there are these sort of outlier examples where you have
Speaker 3: what are essentially shell nonprofits that are just generating profit
Speaker 3: to the third party fundraising consultant, and you want to
Speaker 3: obviously avoid those, like the plague. But there are plenty
Speaker 3: of resources out there on any particular issue area. In
Speaker 3: the book, you know, I tried to describe like if
Speaker 3: you care about this issue area, then here are some
Speaker 3: resources to look at. If you care about this issue area. Yeah,
Speaker 3: I can't go through it all here, we be here
Speaker 3: all day, but like, once you start to zero in,
Speaker 3: you will find the trusted sources that will allow you
Speaker 3: to identify organizations that are really doing excellent work. And
Speaker 3: there are so many out there in every issue area.
Speaker 4: Sounds like it's kind of issue specific or issue dependent.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's either issue dependent or community dependent. I think
Speaker 3: there's different slices on where to go for sort of
Speaker 3: aggregated data about you know, these are some organizations that
Speaker 3: are doing good work.
Speaker 4: Cool, Well, we've got more to get to if you Phil,
Speaker 4: we're going to talk about how to create your own
Speaker 4: shell nonprofit. Maybe we'll have had a money foundation.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about some.
Speaker 4: Different ways that we can all give more effectively and impactfully.
Speaker 1: Right after the break, we're.
Speaker 2: Back to the break, which is talking about giving and
Speaker 2: giving effectively. And we've got the man who is perfect
Speaker 2: for discuss that very thing, Philip Buchanan with us, who
Speaker 2: wrote the book Giving.
Speaker 1: Done Right and Phil Matt and I.
Speaker 2: For a long time, I guess donor advice funds were
Speaker 2: these really expensive things that were kind of for rich
Speaker 2: elites and for the average middle class person. A donor
Speaker 2: advice one just didn't make much sense because of the
Speaker 2: expenses involved, and because I mean, let's be honest, average
Speaker 2: folks aren't giving six figures away on annually. So what
Speaker 2: do you think about donor advice funds though? As the
Speaker 2: costs of come down, are they a helpful tool for
Speaker 2: normal folks? Are they like total overkill?
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 3: I think they can be a helpful tool, and like
Speaker 3: you say, the minimum balances have come down both, I
Speaker 3: think at community foundations as well as at the other
Speaker 3: like commercial donor advice fund providers like a Fidelity Fidelity
Speaker 3: charitable or a Schwab. And I think it's very convenient,
Speaker 3: right because you've you've got your money at the in
Speaker 3: the DAFT, you can invest it and then you can
Speaker 3: just designate which nonprofits you want to support it. You
Speaker 3: could add to the DAFT over time. Now in the
Speaker 3: world that I'm in, the operating nonprofit world, there are
Speaker 3: a lot of critics of donor advise funds because of
Speaker 3: the fact that you get the tax benefit for establishing
Speaker 3: the donor advise fund when you put the money in,
Speaker 3: but the money doesn't necessarily go out, you know, for years, right,
Speaker 3: Like it depends what you choose. And again I'm not
Speaker 3: a tax policy person, so I'm not going to wade
Speaker 3: into that one. But what I would say is, if
Speaker 3: you establish a daft, you know, use it, don't just
Speaker 3: let it sit there idly, really use it for what
Speaker 3: it's intended to be used for. And if you do that,
Speaker 3: then I think it can be a good choice, particularly
Speaker 3: if you know you've got at least a few thousand
Speaker 3: dollars a year that you'd like to be giving away,
Speaker 3: and certainly if you've got much more than.
Speaker 1: That, that makes sense.
Speaker 4: I mean, I think that's kind of one of the
Speaker 4: criticisms I've had, even though I have a donor advice fund,
Speaker 4: and yeah, it's something that I participate in. There's something
Speaker 4: about I guess what happens to you as the giver
Speaker 4: when it's still sitting there, because like in a certain way, like, yes,
Speaker 4: it's technically not mine anymore, but I do get to
Speaker 4: direct it, but it's not mine, but I still get
Speaker 4: to you're still killing the string. I still get to
Speaker 4: log into my account and see that number. And so
Speaker 4: there's something psychologically or emotionally where it's almost like it's
Speaker 4: it's like it still has a grip on you, phil
Speaker 4: But so I guess maybe on that note, let's kind
Speaker 4: of finish the same way you that you and your
Speaker 4: book by talking about, I guess the paradox of generosity,
Speaker 4: talk about how the impacts of giving, how obviously it
Speaker 4: can not only impact those that you are giving too,
Speaker 4: but just maybe that psychological, maybe that emotional component and
Speaker 4: benefit that we receive as givers as well.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, my colleague Grace Nicolett and I have
Speaker 3: a podcast called Giving Done Right Creatively Enough, and we
Speaker 3: have a mix of guests on. But the one thenversations
Speaker 3: that have really stuck with me have been with the
Speaker 3: families and donors who have just decided how much is
Speaker 3: enough and have made a commitment to giving at a sustained,
Speaker 3: you know, high level, and had what that has done
Speaker 3: for them in terms of their own growth as people,
Speaker 3: their own sense of what it is to have a
Speaker 3: legacy on this earth. That ultimately, you know, if you're
Speaker 3: fortunate enough to have considerable assets, you're probably not doing
Speaker 3: your kids a favor by having them inherit them all,
Speaker 3: but you probably are doing them a big favor by
Speaker 3: modeling you know, what it looks like to really give
Speaker 3: in a big way. And as much as we all
Speaker 3: know stories of families that have been torn apart by
Speaker 3: fights over money and resources, you know, their real life
Speaker 3: in the business pages or you know, watching Succession on
Speaker 3: HBO or whatever network it's on. I've witnessed almost the
Speaker 3: inverse of that, the way in which a family commitment
Speaker 3: to giving can bond siblings and parents and different generations
Speaker 3: together in really beautiful ways as they learn what the
Speaker 3: issues are that each of them cares about, and as
Speaker 3: they try to support organizations that are really making a
Speaker 3: difference against those issues. So I think you just get
Speaker 3: so much out of it, And I don't think people
Speaker 3: look back with a lot of regrets about having committed
Speaker 3: a lot philanthropically. You might look back with regrets about
Speaker 3: whether you really, you know, needed that that third car
Speaker 3: which is now a pain to take care of, But
Speaker 3: I don't think you're going to look back with regrets
Speaker 3: about supporting a really great organization over the long term.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they say, you don't miss what you give away,
Speaker 2: and and it's amazing, Yeah, how much of an impact
Speaker 2: it can have on us as individuals. So thank you
Speaker 2: for sharing that, Phil, It's a perfect place to wrap
Speaker 2: it up. Thank you for joining us. Where can our
Speaker 2: listeners find out more about you and your mission to
Speaker 2: help people give more effectively.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we have a website CEP dot org. There's a
Speaker 3: blog with lots of resources about giving that you can
Speaker 3: access from that website. And there's also our podcast, Giving
Speaker 3: Done Right and a website for that podcast, which is
Speaker 3: Giving done right dot org.
Speaker 1: Perfect. We'll make sure the link to.
Speaker 4: The blog, the book, the podcast, all of the above. Phil,
Speaker 4: thank you so much for talking with us today.
Speaker 3: Matt and Joel, thanks for having me appreciate it all.
Speaker 1: Right, Man, that that was a good chat with Phil.
Speaker 2: And man, he's just got so much good information about
Speaker 2: giving effectively.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he does.
Speaker 2: And I feel like it's just especially this time of year,
Speaker 2: this is something we want to highlight, but something we
Speaker 2: like to highlight every year.
Speaker 1: I like that you address the guilt that one feels.
Speaker 4: Oh man, I feel it, Like Phil says, I still say,
Speaker 4: do you want to give ninety nine cents to cancer?
Speaker 4: You're like, and I will say I'm a people pleaser,
Speaker 4: but I still say no every time you start freaking out.
Speaker 4: But it's because I have such.
Speaker 2: A I know what I'm doing with that money, and
Speaker 2: so I don't feel bad because I know that it's
Speaker 2: not like I'm being stingy. I just have other places
Speaker 2: that I've pre selected to give, so I don't necessarily
Speaker 2: even give the spiel. I just say no, thank you,
Speaker 2: not today. But I think you could say that and
Speaker 2: not feel bad. Yeah, but what's your big takeaway from
Speaker 2: this combo?
Speaker 4: Or you can just go ahead and give a little bit,
Speaker 4: just just in the moment if you want to.
Speaker 1: I like what he said to you about you know, hey, the.
Speaker 4: Majority of the vast majority of your dollars, maybe designate
Speaker 4: that towards organizations that are strategically aligned with how it
Speaker 4: does that you want to give, and maybe that other
Speaker 4: twenty percent not only can you support your niece, but
Speaker 4: you see the Santa outside ringing the bell, you someone
Speaker 4: to asks.
Speaker 2: You out the register. I kind of like that ability.
Speaker 2: I don't put that Santa in a headlock or anything
Speaker 2: like that. I just just walk on by.
Speaker 1: You don't do the duct taper underhand and drop the
Speaker 1: web bandits.
Speaker 4: It's a nice little holiday movie call out. But my
Speaker 4: big takeaway is going to be the resource that he mentioned,
Speaker 4: which was the Council on Foundations. So it's COF dot
Speaker 4: org where you can look to some of the different
Speaker 4: local community foundations that work with a number of local
Speaker 4: organizations that are vetted, and so I think in that
Speaker 4: way you can kind of rest assured that these dollars
Speaker 4: are being spent in a more responsible way. Right, there's
Speaker 4: a level of accountability there, but then also the ability
Speaker 4: to see some of these dollars that you're giving go
Speaker 4: to serve the areas that are most geographically proximate to
Speaker 4: wherever you are. I think there's a I don't know,
Speaker 4: there's like a high level of satisfaction. I guess when
Speaker 4: it comes to that kind of give to get to
Speaker 4: see you're giving dollars a play exactly. No, yeah, COF
Speaker 4: dot Org. I think about you though your big takeaway.
Speaker 2: I think my big takeaways when Phil talked kind of
Speaker 2: early on about how we don't think about how certain
Speaker 2: things came to be, and he's right, like it becomes
Speaker 2: kind of the water that we swim in and we
Speaker 2: fail to realize the impact that hundreds of nonprofits around
Speaker 2: the nation, thousands of nonprofits in all likelihood right are
Speaker 2: are having on a dayabaate day, week to week, year
Speaker 2: to year basis. And so it makes me want to
Speaker 2: dig in a little more to see, especially locally, like
Speaker 2: what what impacts have.
Speaker 1: These nonprofits have?
Speaker 3: Like?
Speaker 2: What are the not just even looking at the numbers,
Speaker 2: but man, how does my community look different because these
Speaker 2: nonprofits exist? And so I think that is a really
Speaker 2: good thing to recognize that the world we live in
Speaker 2: would not be the world we live in without many
Speaker 2: of the nonprofits that exist. And it just gets me
Speaker 2: even more excited to support the ones that that matter
Speaker 2: most to me, that are doing the work I want
Speaker 2: to see happened in the world.
Speaker 1: I dig it sweet.
Speaker 4: All right, let's mention the beer you and I enjoyed
Speaker 4: during this episode was called Farina. This is a beer
Speaker 4: by Halfway Crooks, which is a top fermenting lagger.
Speaker 1: You know what that means. I don't technically know that
Speaker 1: top and bottom fermented loggers. I know I.
Speaker 2: Prefer mine diagonally fermented.
Speaker 1: It's something that we should know, given how big of
Speaker 1: a now we just like to drink it. We don't
Speaker 1: we enjoy the flavors.
Speaker 4: I don't know anything, like truly hardly anything about actually
Speaker 4: brewing beer, but this is one of our.
Speaker 1: Favorite local breweries. What were your thoughts?
Speaker 2: So this one was really interesting because I feel like
Speaker 2: a lot of loggers are incredibly clean. This one was
Speaker 2: more yeasty, it was had a thicker mouthfeel. It was
Speaker 2: oh you think so, Yeah, it was like more chewy.
Speaker 2: It was a jewel. I thought it was a joy
Speaker 2: joy to drink this one. But it's also I'm getting
Speaker 2: more and more into loggers because I've had my mouth
Speaker 2: obliterated by so many beers over the years that just
Speaker 2: kind of something a little bit chill, but that also
Speaker 2: has a little bit of mouthfeel, a little bit flavor
Speaker 2: action going on. This This beer's like hitting.
Speaker 1: The spot for me.
Speaker 4: Yeah, somehow it's got that weight in the body while simultaneously,
Speaker 4: like right on the edge of my tongue, it's still
Speaker 4: really bright and kind of lemon citrusy.
Speaker 1: Almost like where it still feels like it's a I
Speaker 1: don't know.
Speaker 4: Maybe that's because it's a fresh beer as opposed to
Speaker 4: something that's been sitting on the shelves for months on end.
Speaker 2: Or maybe it's because of the top fermentation, whatever that means.
Speaker 1: I'm sure it's that, Joel.
Speaker 4: But glad you and I got to enjoy this one
Speaker 4: on today's episode, and head over to hotamoney dot com
Speaker 4: or we'll have links to all of the different resources
Speaker 4: that Phil Buchanan that he mentioned during our conversation's link
Speaker 4: to we've got an article about Daffy ar favorite, Yeah,
Speaker 4: donor advice fund. Yeah, we talked about Dafts there towards
Speaker 4: the end, but yeah, we're big fans. And my criticism
Speaker 4: that the little thing that it's not a doubt, I
Speaker 4: guess in the back of my mind. But it's the
Speaker 4: only question. Is the thing that he addressed where it's
Speaker 4: just like, if you use a donor advised fund, folks,
Speaker 4: make sure that you are not just sitting on it
Speaker 4: and somehow using that increasing number to make you feel
Speaker 4: good about yourself, right, Like it's really it should be
Speaker 4: the number of dollars that you are able to deploy,
Speaker 4: and sticking that money in a donor advice fund isn't
Speaker 4: actually deploying the dollars. It's just sort of sitting there
Speaker 4: in this charity purgatory of both sorts.
Speaker 2: But yeah, yeah, but we'll link to that too, because
Speaker 2: Daffy is the lowest cost donor advice fund that we
Speaker 2: know of, and they do a great job, and that's
Speaker 2: where we have our do over there. They've got a
Speaker 2: great product, no doubt, all right, Matt, that's going to
Speaker 2: do it for this one. Until next time. Best friends
Speaker 2: out and best friends out