The Philanthropy Swamp Audit
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people."
— Martin Luther King, Jr., 1963
Six years after George Floyd’s murder, foundations spoke up. They made major racial justice commitments in 2020. This audit asks what happened next.
Democracy in Color grades ten major commitments, examining not just what foundations promised, but what they funded, whom they put in leadership, and whether their endowments reflect their stated values.
The findings reveal a persistent gap between words and action, alongside examples of foundations that have kept going when the pressure mounted.
Executive Summary
The Gap Between Words and Money
In 2020, foundations announced $16.5 billion in racial justice commitments. But only $3.4 billion in confirmed grants moved that year. And even at its peak, racial justice funding focused on building power in communities of color never exceeded 1.4% of institutional giving.
$16.5B
Pledged in 2020
Total racial justice commitments across the sector.
$3.4B
Confirmed grants in 2020
The amount in grants confirmed as having moved that year, compared with the much larger total pledged.
1.4%
Peak Share of Giving
Racial justice funding never exceeded this share of institutional giving from 2019 to 2023.
90%
Drop in racial justice grant descriptions
Grant dollars described using the phrase “racial justice” fell from $926 million in 2020 to $86.3 million in 2023.
The Retreat
The Backing Away
The pullback began before the most visible political attacks on racial equity. Funding declined, language disappeared from foundation websites, and the tools that once tracked progress fell away.
The Dollar Retreat
Funding focused on Black communities peaked at 2.3% of foundation giving in 2021, then fell to 1.2% by 2023. Funding for racial justice never exceeded 1.4% of institutional giving.
The Language Retreat
One in 12 of the 773 foundations studied by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy had removed or softened language about race, diversity, equity, or inclusion on its website.
The Accountability Retreat
Candid shut down its racial equity funding tracker in May 2024, before most multi-year commitments had run their course. The sector lost a key tool for tracking whether its promises were being kept.
The Silence Retreat
Of the 230 major foundations examined by NCRP, 73% made no public statement about the 2025 attacks on democracy and civil society.
The Report Card
Ten Foundations Graded
What happens after a foundation makes a big promise? We graded ten major racial justice commitments on four questions:
Rhetoric: Did the foundation reaffirm its commitment, using clear language?
Money: Did it deliver what it promised, and can the public track the dollars?
Staff and board: Do leadership and staffing reflect the work?
Endowment: Does the foundation use and disclose the investments behind its mission?
Money counts double in the final grade. The grades below are provisional and may change as foundations provide additional information.
| Foundation | Grade | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| David and Lucile Packard Foundation | A | Rhetoric: reaffirmed racial justice by name in July 2025, amid the federal attacks on race-conscious work. Money: converted its five-year, $100 million fund into a permanent U.S. Racial Justice initiative. Staff: hired a director and program officers. Endowment: deploys program-related investments ($37.7M in 2024) but discloses no manager roster. |
| Mellon Foundation | A− | Rhetoric: 2020 framing was “social justice,” not “racial justice”; not walked back, and forcefully defended in August 2026. Money: doubled the Monuments Project to $500M; over $250M paid. Staff: not yet tabulated. Endowment: undisclosed. |
| MacArthur Foundation | A− | Rhetoric: president said in 2025 that this is “not a time to step back.” Money: delivered the $80M pledged; raised payout to 6%+ and spent over 7% in 2025. Staff: not yet tabulated. Endowment: undisclosed. |
| Bush Foundation | B+ | Rhetoric: reaffirmed in substance. Money: built both $50M community trust funds it promised; disbursing since 2022. Staff: not yet tabulated. Endowment: undisclosed. |
| Ford Foundation | B+ | Rhetoric: no reaffirmation yet located under new president Heather Gerken. Money: $1B social bond fully paid, majority to POC-led groups. Staff: not yet tabulated. Endowment: undisclosed. |
| The Wallace Foundation (New York) | B+ | Rhetoric: race-explicit language kept through 2025–26, though never the words “racial justice.” Money: $53M (2021) to $100M (2022) to $107M (2026) for arts organizations of color. Staff and endowment: not yet tabulated. |
| Bloomberg Philanthropies | B | Rhetoric: Black-wealth framing sustained. Money: Greenwood Initiative — $100M (2020) and a separate $600M (2024) to HBCU medical schools; institutional gifts, not power-building. Staff and endowment: privately governed; undisclosed. |
| William and Flora Hewlett Foundation | C* | Rhetoric: new president silent on racial justice since taking office in September 2024. Money: behind pace on $150M; 2022 shift from external grants to internal integration with no public ledger. Staff: director role filled, but twice turned over. Endowment: $0 in program-related investments; manager roster undisclosed. Cooperated with this audit; responses pending. |
| Gates Foundation | D | Rhetoric: dropped race eligibility from the Gates Scholarship two weeks after an IRS complaint (April 2025). Money: $100M 2020 education pledge never itemized. Staff: not tabulated. Endowment: undisclosed. |
| Chan Zuckerberg Initiative | F | Rhetoric: website scrubbed. Money: $500M five-year racial equity commitment (Dec. 2020) abandoned. Staff: DEI team eliminated. Endowment: not applicable (LLC). |
Grades are provisional. Foundations can improve their grades by providing documentation and following through on their commitments.
Case Study
A Tale of Two Foundations
Hewlett and Packard share the same origin, same valley, same summer of 2020. Both made nine-figure racial justice commitments. Six years later, two very different records.
David & Lucile Packard Grade: A—
When its five-year, $100 million fund reached its planned conclusion, Packard did not let the work end. In July 2025, it announced a permanent U.S. Racial Justice Initiative, reaffirmed the work by name, and built a team to lead it.
Packard still has work to do on transparency. It has not published a year-by-year ledger of the original commitment or disclosed who manages its endowment. But it offers a clear example of a foundation continuing its racial justice work when the political climate became more hostile.
William & Flora Hewlett Grade: C
Hewlett pledged $150 million over ten years, plus $18 million in immediate 2020 funding. Its work got off to a slow start, and in 2022 it shifted away from a standalone grantmaking initiative toward integrating racial justice into its existing programs.
After the audit asked for more information, Hewlett supplied a ledger documenting $106.5 million in awards from 2021 through October 2026 and reaffirmed its commitment. That matters. But awards are not the same as payments: the report estimates that $32 million to $44 million had reached grantees by the end of 2024, against an expected pace of $85.5 million.
Hewlett has made progress, but the public still cannot easily track what the initiative delivered across the full foundation. Its end date has also moved to 2031. The lesson: a promise needs transparent accounting, sustained leadership, and a clear plan for the long term.
Hewlett Deep Dive
When Priorities Are Real
Hewlett’s own initiatives show how much a foundation can accomplish when it makes something a sustained priority. Its racial justice initiative has a different record: a slow start, a shift in strategy, and an accounting that became clearer only after this audit asked for it.
Hewlett’s ledger documents $106.5 million in awards from 2021 through October 2026. Add the $18 million in 2020 funding and the total reaches $124.5 million against the original $150 million commitment.
But awards are not the same as dollars already paid to grantees. Based on Hewlett’s own filings, the audit estimates that $32 million to $44 million had actually reached grantees by the end of 2024, below the $85.5 million expected by that point under the original schedule.
Hewlett says the $150 million was a floor, not a ceiling, and has reaffirmed its commitment. The remaining questions are whether funding will reach organizations on schedule, how the work will continue through 2031, and whether the foundation will account publicly for racial justice funding across its broader portfolio.
Economy & Society
(2020–)
Cybersecurity
(2014–23)
Racial Justice
(2020–)
Committed ($M)
Traced/Trajectory ($M)
The Cybersecurity initative exceeded its target. Economy & Society doubled. Racial justice trails—at roughly $58 million traced against a $150 million, ten-year commitment.
The Endowment Question
The 95% Nobody Talks About
A foundation’s grants are only part of the story. Most of its assets remain invested in its endowment. Who manages that money, what does it cost, and does any of it advance the foundation’s mission?
Who Manages the Money?
A Knight Foundation study found that firms owned by white men manage 98.6% of U.S. investment assets. The study found no performance difference between diverse-owned and non-diverse-owned firms. Yet investment-manager diversity remains largely hidden from public view.
What Does It Cost?
Hewlett’s six investment staff received a reported $62.3 million in compensation from 2020 through 2024. That exceeds the audit’s estimated $32 million to $44 million in racial justice grants actually paid over the same period.
Does the Corpus Serve the Mission?
From 2020 through 2024, Hewlett reported no new program-related investments. Packard reported $37.7 million in program-related investments in 2024 alone. The Nathan Cummings Foundation, meanwhile, moved its entire endowment into mission alignment in 2018.
Foundations can do more than give away a portion of their assets. They can also examine how the rest of their money is invested, managed, and aligned with their stated values.
Every foundation on this report card has a path to a better grade. The next report card is scheduled for May 25, 2027. Here’s what foundations can do before then.
The Remedy
How to Raise a Grade
Reaffirm, by Name
Publish a statement that explicitly reaffirms the 2020 commitment, using the language of the original promise: racial justice, anti-Black racism, and systemic racism. Make clear whether the commitment continues. General language about “equal opportunity” is not a substitute.
Deliver and Ledger
Publish an annual, year-by-year accounting of the commitment: what was announced, what was paid, who received it, and what remains. Commit at least 10% of annual grantmaking to racial justice, provide multi-year and unrestricted support, and make clear how the work continues across the foundation’s programs.
De-SWAMP the Seats
Hire racial justice leaders of color with relevant experience, authority, and job security. Publish the demographics of the board, senior staff, and investment committee every year. Use the report’s 29% straight-white-male population benchmark to assess representation.
Pull Back the Curtain
Disclose the firms managing the endowment, including the share of assets managed by firms owned by people of color and women. Set public goals for diversifying those relationships, explain investment-management costs, and use program-related and mission-related investments to advance the foundation’s mission.
The Lever Nobody Has Pulled
1% for Racial Justice
What if foundations devoted one additional percentage point of their endowment payout to racial justice every year?
For Hewlett, with roughly $14 billion in assets, an extra percentage point would mean $140 million a year. That’s nearly the entire $150 million racial justice commitment it originally spread over a decade.
For Packard, with roughly $8.5 billion in assets, it would mean $85 million a year.
Other foundations have already shown that payout rates can rise. MacArthur committed to a payout of at least 6% in 2025 and 2026 and spent more than 7% in 2025. Freedom Together doubled its payout to 10% in 2025.
The proposal is to make that extra percentage point an ongoing commitment to racial justice, not just a one-year response to a crisis, and to report the dollars every year.
A one-point increase adopted as policy—not a one-year emergency measure—and reported annually is the difference between a gesture and a commitment.
The Math
Hewlett ($14B):
+1% payout = $140M/year
Packard ($8.5B):
+1% payout = $85M/year
MacArthur:
Raised to 6%+, spent 7%+
Freedom Together:
Doubled payout to 10%
Conclusion
The Silence of the Good People
Martin Luther King Jr. was not writing to people who openly opposed equality. He was writing to people who agreed with his goals but asked him to wait. Their silence helped preserve the status quo.
The foundations in this audit are, for the most part, the good people. In 2020, they made commitments to racial justice. In the years that followed, too many backed away as the pressure grew.
But there are examples of a different path. Packard made its racial justice work permanent. Freedom Together doubled its payout and put a movement leader in charge. The Nathan Cummings Foundation aligned its entire endowment with its mission.
These examples show that foundations have choices. They can stand by their commitments, make their money work for their mission, and be transparent about what they do.
The next report card is scheduled for Spring 2027. Until then, every foundation has an opportunity to show that its 2020 promise was more than a moment.
Part 2 - Coming Spring 2027