Philanthropic Foundation Influence: Exploring Language in Annual Reports

• In Event: Poster Session: Political Organizations and Parties

Abstract

There is some evidence that philanthropic foundations act as interest groups in the U. S. policymaking context, yet this topic remains understudied in the political science literature. Foundations may engage in non-traditional or indirect types of influence because they are restricted in ways that other special interests are not, namely tax law that prevents them from engaging in direct lobbying efforts for a specific candidate or piece of legislation. This influence may involve both their money, but also their position as actors often perceived by the public as knowledgeable but non-political. Foundations may use strategies such as agenda-setting and framing in their communications to influence the ways problems and solutions in policymaking are perceived and discussed, serving as an avenue of indirect influence.

Some work in policy administration has sought to understand the impacts of philanthropy on the policy process, but the interest group literature in political science, which seems as though it could be a natural home for this work, has largely left philanthropists out of its discussions. Despite an initial shrinking response to regulatory legislation in the late 1960s, foundations have emerged in recent decades as bold advocates of policy, being quite specific in their aims, programs and goals, and not shying away from use of policy language. In light of this shifting landscape, is it possible that some foundations might act as interest groups? And if so, how might they be engaging in influence?

In my study, I consider foundation annual reports as a potential avenue for agenda-setting and framing of policy issues. I use qualitative and quantitative methods, including hand-coded and automated text analysis, to analyze annual reports from several major philanthropic foundations based in the United States. In my initial hand-coding, I have found evidence of both explicit and less obvious policy language in these reports. Additional themes that emerge include language associated with the business-world and providing a network and/or connecting grantees either with each other or other stakeholders. This language may affect how readers of these materials understand a problem or the solutions that they believe are credible and valid. At the very least, this language reflects the perspective(s) of the foundation funder(s), who are able to potentially exert additional influence through what they do and do not fund. Furthermore, the language a foundation uses may attract or repel potential grantees or job applicants depending on its alignment with their values or beliefs about a particular policy issue.

My findings point to the possibility that foundation materials may serve as another avenue of policy communication in the U. S. political context. Foundation reports, white papers, and other materials can serve as sources of information to elected officials, who have less and less time and resources to devote to research on a policy topic; at the same time, these materials can be a mechanism of influence in shaping how these officials conceptualize a policy issue. The topic of foundation and philanthropist influence on policy relates to the theme this year of “Democracy: Retrenchment, Renovation, & Reimagination,” as it should cause us to consider how these actors, who are unelected, may be exerting influence on policy outcomes.

Author

• Kristen Munnelly, American University