the state of

GLOBAL GIVING
by u.s. foundations
2011-2015
Table of Contents Contributors

Contributors.. ........................................ 2 Caroline Needles

Global Philanthropy Fellow, Council on Foundations
Key Findings on Global Giving by U.S. Foundations.. ................ 3
David Wolcheck
Background. . ..................................... 4
Manager, Data Standards, Foundation Center
Methodology. . .................................... 4
Grace Sato
About Foundation Center’s Grants Data. ................... 4 Manager of Knowledge Services, Foundation Center
Trends in Global Giving by U.S. Foundations. .................... 5
Inga Ingulfsen
International Giving as a Percentage of Total Giving.. ............ 5 Research Analyst, Global Partnerships, Foundation Center

International Giving. . ................................ 6 Larry McGill

Vice President for Knowledge Services, Foundation Center
International Giving by Foundation Type. . ................... 7

Top Funders by International Grant Dollars. .................. 8 Lauren Bradford

Director of Global Partnerships, Foundation Center
Top Funders by Number of International Grants. ............... 8
Natalie Ross
Top Independent Foundations. .......................... 9
Vice President for External Relations, Council on Foundations
Top Corporate Foundations. . ........................... 9

Top Community Foundations. ........................... 9

f o u n d at i o n c e n t e r
Top Operating Foundations. . ........................... 9 f o u n d at i o n c e n t e r . o r g
International Giving by Support Strategy . . ................. 10 Established in 1956, Foundation Center is the leading source of information

Channels of International Giving. . ....................... 11 about philanthropy worldwide. Through data, analysis, and training, it connects
people who want to change the world to the resources they need to succeed.
International Giving by Subject.. ........................ 12
Foundation Center maintains the most comprehensive database on U.S.
International Giving by Population Focus.. .................. 13 and, increasingly, global grantmakers and their grants—a robust, accessible
knowledge bank for the sector. It also operates research, education, and training
Key Facts: U.S. Foundation Funding for Reproductive Health Care.. .. 13
programs designed to advance knowledge of philanthropy at every level.
Key Facts: U.S. Foundation Funding to Combat Climate Change. .... 14 Thousands of people visit Foundation Center’s website each day and are served

Enabling Environment For Cross-Border Giving. .............. 15

in its five library/learning centers and at more than 450 Funding Information
Network locations nationwide and around the world.
Key Facts: U.S. Foundation Funding for Disasters. . ............ 16

International Giving by Select Disaster Types.. ............... 17

c o u n c i l o n f o u n d at i o n s
International Giving by Region.. ............................ 18 cof.org
U.S. Foundation Funding for Global Programs.. ............... 18 An active philanthropic network, the Council on Foundations, founded in

International Giving by Income Level of Beneficiary Country. . ..... 19 1949, is a nonprofit leadership association of grantmaking foundations and
corporations. It provides the opportunity, leadership, and tools needed by
Top Countries by Geographic Focus. . ..................... 19
philanthropic organizations to expand, enhance and sustain their ability to
Top Countries by Recipient Location. ..................... 19 advance the common good. The Council empowers professionals in philanthropy
to meet today’s toughest challenges and advances a culture of charitable giving
Asia & Pacific.. ................................... 20
in the U.S. and globally.
Caribbean. . ..................................... 22

Eastern Europe, Central Asia & Russia. . ................... 24

Copyright © 2018 Foundation Center and the Council on Foundations. This
Latin America & Mexico. ............................. 26 work is licensed under a Create Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0

Middle East & North Africa. ........................... 28

International License, creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0.

Sub-Saharan Africa. . ............................... 30 Printed and bound in the United States of America.

Western Europe. .................................. 32 ISBN 978-1-59542-512-6

Sustainable Development Goals. ........................... 34 Design by ondesign.

2 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

KEY FINDINGS ON GLOBAL GIVING
BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS

In 2015, international giving reached an

$17.9 B (50.7%)
all-time high. The Bill & Melinda Gates
$35.4 B Foundation acounted for
International giving saw a total over half of total int’l
29% increase 2015 giving from 2011 to 2015.
from 2011 to 2015.
$9.3 B More on page 6

2011
$314.5 M
$7.2 B
International giving by
community foundations
more than tripled
from 2011 to 2015.
$1O3.1 M
More on page 7

2011 2015
The average grant size
more than tripled
between 2002 and 2015. DIRECT GIVING

2015 $4.1 B

2002
$604.5 K Only 12% went directly
$200.9 K to local organizations
while 88% went to intermediaries.
More on page 11

I N T E R N AT I O N A L G I V I N G B Y S E L E C T S U B J E C T S , 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 5

HEALTH REPRODUCTIVE
HEALTH CARE
2015
$18.6 B (52.5%) giving nearly tripled.
The Bill & Melinda Gates More on page 13 $1.0 B
2011
Foundation accounted for
$35.4 B
$362.2 M
80% of int’l health giving.
total int’l More on page 12 $178.9 M
giving
2011-2015 CLIMATE CHANGE

$835.6 M (2.4%)
EBOLA $154.2 M
(80%)

More on page 14 Int’l disaster giving saw a

260% increase in 2014,
DISASTERS 80% of which was in int’l
response to the ebola crisis. disaster ebola
$391.3 M (1.1%) giving response
More on page 16 More on page 17
2012 2013 2014 2015

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 3

Background

This report represents the latest in a decades-long collaboration between In addition to a detailed analysis of funding trends by issue areas, regions,
Foundation Center and Council on Foundations to regularly analyze the data population focus, and strategies, this report also relates these trends to
and trends on international grantmaking by U.S. foundations. It’s the tenth key events and developments during the time period, such as the adoption
report published by the two organizations since the collaboration started of the Sustainable Development Goals, the Ebola crisis in West Africa, the
in 1997. In 2017, Foundation Center and the Council on Foundations also reversal of the global gag rule, and the increasing legal restrictions faced
published the first-ever report analyzing international grantmaking by U.S. by civil society in countries around the world. Recognizing the gravity and
community foundations, Local Communities with Global Reach: International complexity of these global challenges we believe it’s more important than
Giving by U.S. Community Foundations. The previous analyses can be ever to monitor and analyze cross-border giving. We celebrate the important
accessed at: https://www.issuelab.org/libraries/foundation_center/ global footprint of American foundations and hope this data and analysis
international_grantmaking_by_us_foundations. accurately captures the challenges and opportunities for U.S. grantmakers
working internationally today.

Methodology

This analysis is based on grants data from Foundation Center’s research sample, grantmakers. Grants to grantmakers are included when adding up the total
FC 1000, which includes all grants of $10,000 or more reported by 1,000 grant dollars awarded by individual foundations.
of the largest U.S. foundations. For the purposes of this analysis, a grant is
For community foundations, discretionary grants are included and donor-
considered international if it’s for a non-U.S. recipient or for a U.S. recipient for
advised grants are included only when provided by the foundation. Grants to
international programs or programs implemented abroad.
individuals are not included.
The geographic distribution of grants is determined by the geographic area
Grants may benefit multiple subjects, and may therefore be counted more
served by each grant. In instances where this information is not available, the
than once.
geographic focus is based on the location of the recipient organization.
Data on bi- and multi-lateral aid are sourced from the Development Assistance
To avoid double counting grant dollars, the analysis of aggregate grantmaking
Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
for specific regions or issue areas does not include grants awarded to other
(OECD). These data can be accessed from http://stats.oecd.org.

About Foundation Center’s Grants Data

In February 2018 Foundation Center’s grants database contained more All the data are processed and indexed according to the facets and
than 8.6 million grant records worth more than $400 billion. The vast codes in the Philanthropy Classification System (PCS), which include
majority of grants in the database—about 97%—represent grantmaking geographic location or area served by organizations and programs,
of U.S.-based foundations. support strategies, subjects, populations served, organization type,
and transaction type. Starting in 2015, all the grants in the database
• Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax form 990. All U.S. foundations
are coded through an automated process with select review by data
are required to submit this form, which contains information about
experts. This process is trained for accuracy with a supervised machine
each grant awarded by the foundation. The majority of the data in
learning model that draws on Foundation Center’s 60 years of experience
Foundation Center’s database are derived from these records.
in manually indexing information about grantmaking. Each grant in the
• Grants reported directly to Foundation Center through the database is assigned all relevant codes, which means one grant can be
eReporting program. Foundations enrolled in this program share data counted towards support for multiple subjects, populations, or strategies.
about their grantmaking directly with Foundation Center. This simultaneous coding allows for exploration of how funding for
multiple subjects, geographies, populations, and strategies intersect.
• Publicly available sources. Foundation Center also collects publicly
available information about grantmaking, including from open
databases and news sources.

4 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

TRENDS IN GLOBAL GIVING
BY U . S . FO UNDAT IONS, 2011–2015

The average grant size $24.2 B $24.0 B

more than tripled from 2002 to 2015. $21.3 B $21.8 B

INT’L GIVING OVERALL

$35.4 B $6.3 B
$7.2 B

$130.4 B (27.1%)
$5.2 B
$4.5 B
total giving
2011-2015 2015 INT’L 2008 2009 2010 2011

$604.5 K
2002
$200.9 K Both overall and int’l grantmaking resumed a
long-term trend of growth
in 2011 after a two-year decrease following
the financial crisis.

INT’L GRANTS $32.6 B

Average int’l grant size was $482.1 K
73,427 grants more than 3x $24.0 B
(9.4%)
larger than average
domestic grant size.
780,105 $7.2 B
$9.3 B
total grants
2011-2015 $134.5 K 2011 2015 2011 2015
OVERALL GIVING INT’L GIVING

36% 29%
DOMESTIC INT’L INCREASE INCREASE

I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING AS A PERCEN TAG E OF TOTAL G IV I N G , 2002–2015

International Grant Dollars as a Percentage of Total Grant Dollars Number of International Grants as a Percentage of Total Grants

29.9%
30% 28.4%
25.9% 26.3%
25.5%
24.5%
25%
22.2% 22.5% 25.3%

20% 19.0%
20.5%
16.1%
17.5%
15% 13.9%

10.1% 9.8% 10.1%

9.1% 9.3% 9.3% 9.4% 9.3% 9.3% 9.1%
10% 8.8% 9.0% 8.9% 8.9%

5%

0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation accounted year period. When excluding Gates, international giving did not recover
for 51% of international giving from 2011 to 2015 and the 2012 to pre-crisis levels until 2012, before decreasing slightly and reaching
decrease in overall international giving was largely due to a spike in their a high of nearly $4 billion in 2015. The growth in the average size of
grantmaking in 2011. When Gates’ grantmaking is excluded from the international grants also holds when excluding Gates, with an increase of
dataset, international giving grew at a slower rate (21%) during the five- 19% from $240,701 in 2011 to $285,992 in 2015.

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 5

 I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING , 2002–2015
International Grant Dollars: All U.S. Foundations Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Silicon Valley Community Foundation

$10 B

$9.3 B

$8 B

$7.2 B

$6.8 B
$6.4 B
$6.3 B

$6 B $5.7 B

$5.3 B
$5.2 B $5.2 B
$4.5 B

$4.3 B
$3.9 B
$4 B
$3.5 B
$3.0 B $3.1 B
$2.9 B
$2.7 B
$2.4 B $2.3 B $2.2 B
$2.3 B
$2.1 B
$2.0 B
$2 B $1.6 B

$1.2 B
$1.0 B
$664.7 M
$537.7 M
$198.2 M
$54.2 M $97.4 M
$43.4 M $45.7 M $50.7 M $33.3 M $35.2 M $51.1 M
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Silicon Valley Community Foundation

In 2006, the consolidation of two community foundations in California The growth in int’l giving by community foundations
created the Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF), which has
since grown into the largest community foundation in the United States was largely driven by SVCF.
and the world. When SVCF was created, the organization embraced a
new definition of what community means, moving beyond a place-based
$314.5 M
construct to better reflect the broad philanthropic interests of their
region. Silicon Valley is an incredibly diverse region, and many donors
have leveraged SVCF as a philanthropic partner for donor and corporate
advised funds that support organizations around the world. $910.0 M SVCF

int’l giving $198.2 M 63.0%

Today, SVCF supports the diverse interests of its donors and their by community
foundations,
connections to local, national and global communities, recognizing 2011-2015 $103.1 M
that social issues are not confined to singular spaces. To support their
international grantmaking, SVCF manages a global charity database SVCF
with more than 11,000 vetted organizations in 88 countries. Although $35.2 M 34.1%
SVCF made $198M in grants for international programs in 2015, that
SVCF total int’l
giving by
total int’l
giving by
represents less than a quarter of their overall grantmaking that year and community community
foundations foundations
the majority of SVCF’s grantmaking continues to be for domestic programs. $436.1 M (47.9%) 2011 2015

6 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING BY F OUN DATI ON TY P E , 2011–2015

$35.4 B
total international
grant dollars
2011-2015

INDEPENDENT FOUNDATIONS CORPORATE FOUNDATIONS COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONS OPERATING FOUNDATIONS

$31.8 B $2.2 B $910.0 M $501.2 M

89.7% 6.3% 2.6% 1.4%
BILL AND MELINDA SILICON VALLEY
GATES FOUNDATION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
$17.9 B $436.1 M
56.5% OF INDEPENDENT 47.9% OF COMMUNITY
FOUNDATION DOLLARS FOUNDATION DOLLARS

International giving by Even when excluding SVCF, $116.3 M

community foundations $314.5 M int’l giving by community
2011 COMMUNITY
more than tripled total int’l
FOUNDATION GIVING foundations saw a
from 2011 to 2015. giving
2011 $103.1 M (1.4%) 71% increase
from 2011 to 2015.

$67.9 M

$1O3.1 M 2015 COMMUNITY

FOUNDATION GIVING
total int’l
giving
2015
$314.5 M (3.4%)

2011 2015 2011 2015

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 7

 TOP FUNDE R S BY IN T ERNAT IONAL G R AN T DOLLAR S , 2011–2015
(% OF FUNDER’S RANK
AVERAGE RANK INTERNATIONAL $ TOTAL $) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 17,990,304,573 (87.0%) 1 1 1 1 1

2. The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation $ 1,107,845,151 (49.0%) 4 4 4 3 2

3. Ford Foundation $ 1,049,558,292 (40.6%) 3 3 3 4 4

4. Foundation to Promote Open Society $ 872,228,798 (59.2%) 11 10 2 2 2

5. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $ 750,918,359 (52.3%) 7 5 8 5 6

6. Walton Family Foundation $ 593,716,706 (30.5%) 2 6 15 10 16

7. The Rockefeller Foundation $ 542,631,413 (75.2%) 8 11 5 8 8

8. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation $ 481,419,773 (37.4%) 5 8 6 20 11

9. Open Society Institute $ 476,158,807 (80.6%) 22 2 20 198 376

10. Silicon Valley Community Foundation $ 437,254,191 (16.9%) 20 13 14 7 5

11. Bloomberg Philanthropies $ 402,289,429 (53.5%) 12 17 7 -- 7

12. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation $ 395,144,642 (34.4%) 10 9 9 11 14

Up in rank No change Down in rank

TOP FUNDE R S BY NUMBER OF INT ERNATI ON AL G R AN TS , 2011–2015

(% OF FUNDER’S RANK
AVERAGE RANK NO. OF INT’L GRANTS TOTAL GRANTS) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 5,238 (65.2%) 1 2 1 1 1

2. Ford Foundation 4,044 (53.0%) 2 1 2 3 3

3. Silicon Valley Community Foundation 2,649 (15.3%) 3 5 4 2 2

4. Foundation to Promote Open Society 2,328 (52.4%) 6 4 3 4 4

5. Citi Foundation 1,234 (39.6%) 4 6 24 7 19

6. The Rockefeller Foundation 1,124 (69.4%) 8 10 7 11 7

7. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation 1,068 (49.3%) 9 8 14 8 12

8. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 955 (29.8%) 21 14 11 6 11

9. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation 925 (26.1%) 16 16 10 17 6

10. John Templeton Foundation 924 (29.1%) 30 11 9 5 17

11. The Coca-Cola Foundation, Inc. 894 (52.0%) 20 19 8 12 15

12. Seattle Foundation 894 (12.6%) 19 22 12 10 8

8 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 TOP I NDE P E NDENT F OUNDAT ION S TOP COR P OR ATE F OU N DATI ON S

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 17,990,304,573 1. The Coca-Cola Foundation, Inc. $ 286,374,001

2. The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation $ 1,107,845,151 2. Citi Foundation $ 144,223,736

3. Ford Foundation $ 1,049,558,292 3. The JPMorgan Chase Foundation $ 126,076,009

4. Foundation to Promote Open Society $ 872,228,798 4. Caterpillar Foundation $ 115,306,761

5. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $ 750,918,359 5. GE Foundation $ 111,407,965

6. Walton Family Foundation $ 593,716,706 6. ExxonMobil Foundation $ 104,247,145

7. The Rockefeller Foundation $ 542,631,413 7. The UPS Foundation $ 85,934,876

8. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation $ 481,419,773 8. The Wal-Mart Foundation, Inc. $ 77,604,642

9. Bloomberg Philanthropies $ 402,289,429 9. Johnson & Johnson Family of Companies Contribution Fund $ 65,336,738

10. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation $ 395,144,642 10. The Goldman Sachs Foundation $ 64,116,151

11. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation $ 349,850,602 11. The Bank of America Charitable Foundation, Inc. $ 61,980,053

12. Howard G. Buffett Foundation $ 345,016,114 12. The PepsiCo Foundation, Inc. $ 60,806,336

TOP C O MMUNITY F OUNDAT ION S TOP OP E R ATI N G F OU N DATION S

1. Silicon Valley Community Foundation $ 437,254,191 1. Open Society Institute $ 476,158,807

2. Foundation For The Carolinas $ 66,179,379 2. Open Doors International, Inc. $ 105,101,352

3. Seattle Foundation $ 35,163,372 3. New Mighty Foundation $ 72,515,724

4. Boston Foundation, Inc. $ 30,563,801 4. The Lawrence Ellison Foundation $ 36,122,190

5. The New York Community Trust $ 27,332,766 5. The Packard Humanities Institute $ 22,508,024

6. The San Francisco Foundation $ 23,496,574 6. Western Union Foundation $ 20,297,270

7. Greater Houston Community Foundation $ 21,374,611 7. J. Paul Getty Trust $ 19,373,740

8. Marin Community Foundation $ 20,884,062 8. World Children’s Fund $ 16,364,987

9. Greater Kansas City Community Foundation $ 18,513,137 9. The Conservation Land Trust $ 12,882,200

10. The Chicago Community Trust $ 15,680,026 10. The Draper Richards Kaplan Foundation $ 6,100,000

11. The Columbus Foundation and Affiliated Organizations $ 14,382,053 11. Gordon Foundation $ 1,845,000

12. The San Diego Foundation $ 13,173,690 12. Waterford Foundation $ 911,000

Note: In some rare cases a given foundations’ international giving may not be available in
Foundation Center’s annual research set for a given grant year.

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 9

 I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING BY SUPPORT STR ATE GY, 2011–2015
DEFINITIONS $6 B

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT $5.3 B

To support specific projects or programs (57.3%)
as opposed to the general purpose of
an organization. $5 B $4.7 B
(73.5%)
$4.4 B
RESEARCH AND EVALUATION (61.6%) $4.7 B
Efforts to discover, collect, analyze, (69.1%)
interpret, and disseminate data,
information, and knowledge, and the $4 B
applications of that knowledge. $3.9 B
(68.3%) $3.2 B
POLICY, ADVOCACY AND SYSTEMS REFORM (50.5%) $3.1 B
(33.9%)
To develop, promote, and transform
public policies, such as through proposing $3 B $2.7 B
(37.2%)
novel solutions to ongoing challenges $2.9 B $2.9 B
encountered by political, economic and (42.3%) (30.9%)
social systems and institutions.
$2.4 B
$2.3 B (42.4%) $2.2 B
GENERAL SUPPORT $2 B (31.8%) (23.8%)
Support for the day-to-day operating $1.4 B
(20.8%)
costs of an organization or to further the $1.7 B $1.2 B
general purpose of an organization. (23.4%) $1.0 B (19.0%)
(17.6%) $915.9 M
$1 B $777.5 M (13.5%)
CAPACITY BUILDING AND TECHNICAL (12.1%)
$935.3 M
ASSISTANCE (16.3%) $900.1 M
Efforts to increase an organization’s $769.0 M (9.7%)
$588.8 M (11.9%) $686.3 M
sustainability and effectiveness through $555.4 M (10.1%)
(7.7%) (10.3%)
strategic planning, organizational
assessment and development. 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY BUILDING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

$3.7 B (10.6%)

$23.1 B (65.2%) GENERAL SUPPORT

$6.3 B (17.7%)
Large grants awarded by
POLICY, ADVOCACY
Bill & Melinda AND SYSTEMS REFORM
Gates Foundation
for polio vaccine development $9.5 B (26.7%)
were responsible for a large
share of the increase in funding RESEARCH
for program development. AND EVALUATION
Note: Each grant may benefit multiple strategies.
As a result, figures do not add up to 100 percent. $13.7 B (38.7%)
International Giving Remains Project-Focused
Most international grants from U.S. foundations support specific projects responsive to changing contexts that impact their work, without seeking
or programs, despite continued calls from non-profit leaders to increase funder approval.1
general support grants.
1 See for example: Koob, A., Ingulfsen, I., Tolson, B. Facilitating Financial
Does project support, as opposed to general support grants, hinder Sustainability: Funder Approaches to Facilitating CSO Financial Sustainability.
LINC, Peace Direct, and Foundation Center, 2018. Bell, J., Masoka, J., Zimmerman,
non-profits? A growing body of research suggests unrestricted S. Nonprofit sustainability: Making strategic decisions for financial viability.
funding is critical to the effectiveness and sustainability of civil San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, 2010; Goggins, A., Howard, D. “The Nonprofit
Starvation Cycle.” Stanford Social Innovation Review Fall 2009; House, M., Krehely,
society organizations. This is because general support grants allow J., 2005. Not All Grants Are Created Equal: Why Nonprofits Need General Operating
organizations to cover the full costs of doing their work, which improves Support from Foundations. National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy;
Jagpal, N., Laskowski, K., 2013. The State of General Operating Support 2011.
their overall financial sustainability by allowing them to be nimble and
National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy.

10 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 C H ANNE L S O F INT ERNAT IONAL G IVING , 2011–2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

U.S.-BASED INTERMEDIARY

$20.5 B (57.9%)
U.S.-BASED INTERMEDIARY

48,965 (66.7%)

NON-U.S.-BASED INTERMEDIARY NON-U.S.-BASED INTERMEDIARY

$10.8 B (30.4%) 7,514 (10.2%)

DIRECT

DIRECT
16,948 (23.1%)
$4.1 B (11.7%)
GENERAL SUPPORT DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS GENERAL SUPPORT DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
$381.8 M (9.2% of DIRECT FUNDING / 1.1% OF TOTAL) 2,002 (11.8% of DIRECT FUNDING / 2.7% OF TOTAL)

DIRECT GIVING GENERAL SUPPORT GENERAL SUPPORT

DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
total total total
int’l giving
2011-2015 $4.1 B direct giving
2011-2015 $381.8 M
int’l giving
2011-2015 $381.8 M
(11.7%) (9.2%) (1.1%)

International Giving Continues to Flow Through Intermediaries

Calls for aid to localize so that more funds flow directly to civil society • Multilateral institutions working globally, such as funding through the
groups is not a new debate. This analysis shows that U.S. foundations World Health Organization.
continue to fund primarily through intermediaries. Further, direct grants
• Research institutions conducting public health research or vaccination
to local organizations were substantially smaller in size, averaging just programs targeted at specific countries that differ from the country
under $242K, while grants to intermediaries averaged just over $554K. where they are headquartered.
However, it’s important to note that these intermediaries vary in type and
DEFINITIONS
structure and our data included a variety of intermediary organizations,
U.S. BASED INTERMEDIARY: refers to grants awarded to U.S.-based
such as:
organizations for work implemented in or focused on another country.
• INGOs operating programs in a different country than the country
NON-U.S. BASED INTERMEDIARY: refers to grants awarded to an
where they are headquartered.
organization based outside the U.S., but for work focused on or implemented
• U.S. public charities re-granting funds directly to local organizations. in a different country that the country where that organization is based.
To avoid double-counting dollars, these grantmaking public charities are
not part of Foundation Center’s research set but represent an important DIRECT: refers to grants awarded to organizations based in the country
group of funders specifically focused on channeling funds directly to which the grant was serving.
local organizations. GENERAL SUPPORT DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS: general
• Organizations indigenous to their geographic region but working across support grants to organizations based in the country which the grant
countries, i.e. not just in the country where they are headquartered. was serving.

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 11

 I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING BY SUBJ ECT, 2011–2015
Including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Excluding the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Note: Each grant can benefit multiple subjects.

HEALTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT

$18.6 B (52.5%) $4.4 B (12.5%) $3.9 B (10.9%)

$6 B $1.2 B $1 B
$5.4 B $1.1 B
$838.5 M $866.4 M
$795.2 M
$5 B $1 B $929.1 M
$872.1 M $800 M $691.5 M
$4.0 B $662.7 M
$760.1 M $768.9 M $772.3 M
$4 B $800 M $745.9 M
$3.3 B $675.4 M $600 M $650.0 M
$3.5 B $604.8 M $584.5 M
$3 B $600 M

$528.6 M $519.6 M $501.8 M $400 M

$2 B $2.4 B $400 M $505.2 M

$200 M
$1 B $200 M
$854.3 M
$709.0 M $691.0 M $756.9 M $740.2 M
0 0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY EDUCATION HUMAN RIGHTS

$2.9 B (8.3%) $2.8 B (7.9%) $2.4 B (6.6%)

$800 M $800 M $600 M

$674.3 M $694.3 M $508.1 M $510.0 M
$700 M $644.6 M $700 M
$612.7 M $500 M $443.9 M $459.7 M
$558.4 M $431.5 M
$600 M $542.8 M $529.8 M $600 M $647.4 M $493.2 M
$481.4 M
$592.8 M $496.7 M $518.7 M $476.7 M $400 M
$500 M $500 M $423.9 M
$372.0 M $376.6 M
$400 M $400 M $464.8 M $300 M
$441.3 M
$414.7 M
$300 M $300 M
$200 M
$200 M $200 M
$204.1 M
$100 M
$100 M $122.0 M $127.6 M $136.6 M $136.9 M $100 M

0 0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

SCIENCE & ENGINEERING RELIGION PEACE & SECURITY

$1.9 B (5.4%) $1.0 B (2.8%) $266.8 M (0.8%)

$241.7 M
$500 M $480.0 M $250 M $80 M
$72.6 M
$203.5 M $70 M
$397.5 M $241.7 M $188.6 M $188.0 M
$400 M $200 M $178.7 M
$352.5 M $203.5 M $60 M $63.9 M
$184.6 M $48.3 M $50.7 M $51.2 M
$358.6 M
$300 M $338.0 M $150 M $166.2 M $161.3 M $50 M $44.0 M
$48.3 M $48.4 M
$40 M $43.4 M
$197.7 M $41.6 M
$200 M $100 M $30 M

$167.6 M $164.1 M $20 M

$100 M $148.9 M $143.0 M $50 M
$10 M

0 0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

12 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING BY POPULAT ION F OCU S , 2011–2015
AVG. GRANT SIZE % CHANGE FROM
CHILDREN & YOUTH 2011-2015 2011-2015

$10.3 B (29.1%) $ 752,733 +60.8%

WOMEN & GIRLS

$4.9 B (13.8%) $ 640,683 +77.0%

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

$2.5 B (7.1%) $ 1,234,739 +44.4%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS

$2.1 B (6.1%) $ 1,219,890 -81.3%

MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$446.5 M (1.3%) $ 202,305 -13.4%

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES

$422.0 M (1.2%) $ 214,527 45.1%

LGBTQ PEOPLE

$63.1 M (0.2%) $ 158,971 144.7%

Note: Figures represent only grants that could be identified as serving specific populations and these figures
do not reflect all giving benefiting these groups. In addition, grants may benefit multiple population groups.

KE Y FACTS: U.S. F OUN DAT ION F UNDING F OR R E P R ODU CTI V E HE ALTH CAR E , 201 1 – 2 0 1 5
$1.0 B
International giving INT’L RHC GIVING
DOMESTIC for reproductive
health care grew
total
int’l
$3.1 B (8.7%)
$4.4 B $1.4 B (30.5%)
more than 2x
giving
total
reproductive as a share of total
health care
giving INTERNATIONAL international giving
from 5% in 2011 to
$3.1 B (69.5%) 11% in 2015.
INT’L RHC GIVING
total
int’l
health
$3.1 B (16.6%)
$362.2 M giving
$336.6 M

AVERAGE GRANT SIZE AVERAGE GRANT SIZE $209.4 M

DOMESTIC INTERNATIONAL
DOMESTIC RHC GIVING
$234.3 K $1.2 M 2011 2015 2011 2015
total
domestic
$1.4 B (1.4%)
giving
INT’L RHC DOMESTIC RHC
184% INCREASE 61% INCREASE

In 2009 the Obama administration reversed the global gag rule. The and other non-government donors from providing support
rule restricted foreign NGOs from using any of their own, non-U.S. for reproductive health care to NGOs that rely on U.S. federal
Government funds to provide, counsel, or refer for abortions if funds to sustain other parts of their operations and programs.
they were also receiving funds from the U.S. government for other The increase in reproductive health care funding in the years
activities. While the use of U.S. Government funds for these services immediately following the reversal is suggestive of the gag rule’s
has been restricted since 1973, the gag rule prevented foundations effect on non-government funding flows.

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 13

 KE Y FACTS: U.S. F OUN DAT ION F UNDING TO COM BAT CLIM ATE CHAN G E , 2011–20 1 5

INT’L CLIMATE CHANGE GIVING

AVERAGE DOMESTIC

$835.6 M
CLIMATE CHANGE

$1.3 B
GRANT SIZE
AVERAGE INT’L

total climate change

(63.5%) CLIMATE CHANGE
GRANT SIZE
$276.0 K
giving, 2011-2015

$717.8 K AVERAGE TOTAL

CLIMATE CHANGE
DOMESTIC CLIMATE CHANGE GIVING GRANT SIZE

$480.8 M (36.5%) $453.0 K

TOTAL INTERNATIONAL DOMESTIC

CLIMATE CHANGE CLIMATE CHANGE CLIMATE CHANGE
GIVING GIVING GIVING

total giving
$1.3 B total int’l $835.6 M domestic $480.8 M
giving giving
2011-201
1% 5 (1.0%) 2011-201
2.4% 5 (2.4%) 2011-201
0.5% 5 (0.5%)

The main driver behind the 2012 increase

$2.5 B was a $100 M grant awarded by the

William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to $2.31 B
ClimateWorks Foundation.
$2.09 B
$1.99 B
$2 B $1.92 B $1.95 B

$1.5 B

$1 B

$838.5 M $866.4 M 9.4%

$795.2 M
$691.5 M
increase
$662.7 M from 2011.
$478.1 M
$500 M
$349.3 M $337.8 M $364.5 M $331.3 M
$253.7 M $273.7 M $259.1 M
$236.8 M $229.1 M
$278.8 M $285.7 M
$181.4 M $182.8 M $145.6 M $135.0 M
$94.7 M $89.3 M $108.3 M $142.7 M
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

ENVIRONMENT Note: We know that at least 64% of total U.S. foundation giving for climate
DOMESTIC change from 2011 to 2015 was international, meaning it was reported as
CLEAN ENERGY having a specified non-U.S. geographic focus. This proportion decreased
INTERNATIONAL by 12% from 2011 to 2015, reaching a high of 85% in 2012, the same year
CLIMATE CHANGE
that overall climate change funding was at its highest during the time period.

14 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 E N AB L ING E NVIRON M EN T F OR CROSS- BOR D E R G I V I N G
RANK BY RECIPIENT DIRECT GIVING TO ENABLING ENVIRONMENT FOR CROSS-
DIRECT GIVING COUNTRY COUNTRY (2015), USD BORDER FLOWS SCORE (2014-2015)2
Cross-Border Flows Score: 1 Switzerland $ 1,894,678,464 N/A

4.1 and up 2 United Kingdom $ 403,798,388 4.0

3.1 to 4.0 3 France $ 207,438,512 4.8

4 India $ 192,550,695 2.1
3.0 and less
5 South Africa $ 135,707,689 3.0
N/A 6 Nigeria $ 129,023,937 2.6
7 Canada $ 125,449,101 4.0
Note: This list shows the top 20 non-U.S. 8 Israel $ 86,840,736 N/A
recipient countries of international grants
9 Netherlands $ 81,629,096 5.0
by dollar amount in 2015, along with each
country’s score on the 2014–2015 Global 10 Mexico $ 74,025,273 3.5
Philanthropy Index’s measure of enabling
environment for cross-border flows. The 11 China $ 70,210,074 3.5
list shows recipient countries ranked by 12 Kenya $ 62,521,442 2.0
the amount of funding awarded directly
to organizations based in that country, 13 Brazil $ 42,490,642 3.5
not by the geographic focus of the grant 14 Belgium $ 40,334,596 N/A
and is therefore different from the list of
top countries on page 19. 15 Australia $ 38,591,471 3.8
16 Germany $ 35,492,374 4.2
17 Denmark $ 32,977,751 N/A

18 Senegal $ 32,409,256 3.6

19 Hungary $ 30,839,243 3.5

20 Pakistan $ 30,257,914 2.8

Increasing Legal Restrictions on Foreign Funding

Globally, governments continue to propose and pass legislation that Even as governments continue to enact restrictions on cross-border
impacts how civil society operates. In many countries, these restrictions can funding, our data does not show a correlation between the amount of
complicate direct grantmaking to local organizations for U.S. foundations. funding flowing from U.S. foundations to a given country in 2015 and that
country’s score on the Index of Philanthropic Freedom indicator of the
Between 2012 and 2015, the International Center for Not-for-Profit
environment for cross-border flows for the period spanning 2014–2015
Law found that 98 laws constraining the freedoms of association or
(we found a correlation value of just 0.10). Of the 20 countries receiving
assembly were proposed or enacted across more than 55 countries. 36%
the most direct funding from U.S. foundation in 2015, five scored lower
of these laws limited intentional funding of local civil society groups.3
than the global average of 3.4, indicating a challenging legal environment
R E ST R IC T IV E I N I T IAT I V E S S I N C E 2 0 1 2 for cross-border giving. India is a notable example, ranking fourth by direct
EAST ASIA & THE PACIFIC 14 giving but receiving a score of just 2.1.
WESTERN HEMISPHERE 15
MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA 16
These findings challenge our assumptions about the impact of the legal

SOUTH & CENTRAL ASIA 17 environment on funding flows and suggest a more complex relationship

EUROPE & EURASIA 17

than we would expect. U.S. foundations should consider the following

19
questions as they determine their strategies for supporting organizations
SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
in difficult environments: Why does a significant amount of funding reach
How do governments restrict civil society organizations’ access to certain difficult environments, and not others? Are any of the strategies
international funding? In some countries, national governments require and mechanisms for channeling funds to countries with difficult legal
pre-approval of all grants made or grantees must have prior permission to environments transferable across country contexts?
receive foreign funds. They can also mandate that all foreign funding must
be routed through government entities. Other countries stigmatize local 2 Enabling environment for cross-border flows score for each country, from the
organizations receiving foreign support with “foreign agent” laws. Yet 2015 Index of Philanthropic Freedom, Hudson Institute, https://globalindices.
iupui.edu/environment/. The analysis is based on data on the enabling environment
other countries enact foreign funding caps for non-profits and taxation
for philanthropy across 64 countries for the time period from 2014 to 2015.
of foreign funding. Governments also refer to counterterrorism and anti-
3 Rutzen, Doublas, “Aid Barriers and the Rise of Philanthropic Protectionism”,
money laundering as justifications for onerous and complicated reporting International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law / vol. 17, no. 1, March 2015 / 1.
and registration requirements for grantmakers and grantees. http://www.icnl.org/research/journal/vol17ss1/Rutzen.pdf

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 15

 K E Y FAC TS : U.S . F OUN DAT ION F UNDING F OR D ISASTE R S , 2012–2015

INT’L DISASTER GIVING

INT’L DISASTER GIVING

$391.3 M
$391.3 M (1.1%)
$612.1 M (63.9%)
total int’l
1%
giving
2012-2015
total disaster
giving
2012-2015

DOMESTIC DISASTER GIVING

$220.7 M (36.1%)
2012 2012 was the first year that
$250 M disaster giving was tracked through
Measuring the State of
$225.7 M
Disaster Philanthropy.

$200 M

$192.3 M
(85.2%)
$158.1 M
$150 M

$116.9 M AVERAGE GRANT SIZE

$111.4 M INTERNATIONAL

$100 M
$99.8 M
(63.1%)
$364.O K
$50 M $53.4 M
$45.9 M (45.7%)
(41.2%)
AVERAGE GRANT SIZE
DOMESTIC

$200.3 K
0
2012 2013 2014 2015

DOMESTIC INTERNATIONAL

The Center for Disaster Philanthropy partnered with Foundation

Center in 2014 on Measuring the State of Disaster Philanthropy,
an initiative to track philanthropic funding flows for disasters.
The initiative aims to make disaster philanthropy more effective
by collecting and sharing data on disaster giving.4 Learn more at
disasterphilanthropy.foundationcenter.org

16 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 I N TE RNATIO NA L G IV ING BY SELECT D ISASTE R TY P E S , 2012–2015

NATURAL DISASTERS 260% increase

EBOLA (A SUB-CATEGORY OF NATURAL DISASTERS)
from 2013
COMPLEX HUMANITARIAN EMERGENCIES
$178.9 M

In 2014, 80% of int'l

$154.2 M
disaster giving was for the
ebola response.
$150 M

$100 M

$79.1 M
$75.9 M

$64.9 M

$50 M

$27.2 M
$26.6 M

$12.1 M $10.8 M
$7.7 M

0
2012 2013 2014 2015

Mounting Humanitarian Needs

Violent conflict and natural disasters were key drivers of mounting humanitarian disasters as well as assistance strategies spanning all stages of
response from resilience, risk reduction and mitigation, preparedness, response
humanitarian needs during the time period between 2011 and 2015. The
and relief, and reconstruction and recovery. For more information, see http://
annual number of deaths from violent conflict worldwide more than tripled disasterphilanthropy.foundationcenter.org/about/.
from 49,000 in 2010 to 180,000 in 2014.5 The number of forcibly displaced 5 The International Institute for Strategic Studies (ISS), “Armed Conflict
people worldwide rose from 42.5 million in 2011—already a record high Survey 2015”, http://www.worldcat.org/title/iiss-armed-conflict-survey-
2015-the-worldwide-review-of-political-and-humanitarian-trends-in-
since the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) started current-conflicts/oclc/911264045.
tracking forced displacement—to 65.3 million in 2015.6 During the same time
6 The term forcibly displaced persons includes refugees, internally displaced
period a cumulative total of 761 million people were killed or directly affected persons and asylum seekers. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
by natural disasters.7 How did U.S. funders respond to natural disasters and (UNHCR), “Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2015”, http://www.unhcr.
org/576408cd7.pdf.
humanitarian crises during this time period?
7 Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, October 31 2016,
“Annual Disaster Statistical Review 2015: The Numbers and Trends, https://
4 The taxonomy used to identify and classify disaster funding was developed based reliefweb.int/report/world/annual-disaster-statistical-review-2015-
on a review of 15 existing taxonomies and includes natural, man-made, and complex numbers-and-trends.

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 17

INTERNATIONAL GIVING BY REGION
2011–2015

WESTERN EUROPE

$2.0 B (5.6%)
6,507 grants (8.9%)

CARIBBEAN

$343.4 M (1.0%)
1,904 grants (2.6%)

LATIN AMERICA & MEXICO

$2.7 B (7.7%)
8,259 grants (11.2%)

SUB-SAHARAN
AFRICA MIDDLE EAST &
NORTH AFRICA

$9.0 B (25.4%) $1.7 B (4.7%)

9,869 grants (13.4%) 6,857 grants (9.3%)

U . S . FO UNDATION F UNDING F OR G LOBAL P R OG R AM S

GLOBAL PROGRAMS
The average grant size was $765 K,
higher than average for overall giving.

$35.4 B
$18.6 B 64% of funding to Global Programs came from
total int’l
giving
2011-2015
(52.6%) Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
24,349 grants (33.2%)

68% of all Global Programs funding went to

Health programs.

18 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 TOP COU N TR IE S BY G E OG R AP HI C FO C U S

1. India $ 1.4 B

2. Israel $ 1.2 B

3. Nigeria $ 1.0 B

4. China $ 892.6 M

EASTERN EUROPE, 5. Mexico $ 782.8 M

CENTRAL ASIA & RUSSIA

$570.2 M (1.6%) 6. United Kingdom $ 598.7 M

2,475 grants (3.4%)

7. Ethiopia $ 459.1 M

8. South Africa $ 424.1 M

9. Kenya $ 406.3 M

10. Canada $ 390.9 M

TOP COU N TR IE S BY R E CIP I E N T L O CAT I O N

1. United States $ 20.5 B

2. Switzerland $ 5.4 B
ASIA & PACIFIC
$6.6 B (18.7%)
3. United Kingdom $ 1.7 B

11,446 grants (15.6%)

4. India $ 667.4 M

I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING BY IN COME L E V E L

O F B E NE FIC IA RY COUN T RY 5. South Africa $ 588.3 M

6. Kenya $ 491.2 M
LOWER-MIDDLE UPPER-MIDDLE
INCOME INCOME

$4.3 B $3.2 B
38.6% 28.1% 7. Canada $ 475.1 M

8. Nigeria $ 450.5 M
HIGH INCOME
$1.9 B
$3.1 B 27.8%
LOW INCOME 9. China $ 364.3 M
16.7%

Note: Percentages reflect proportion of dollars that were possible to allocate to specific 10. Israel $ 350.7 M
countries. Of the total $35.4 billion in international grant dollars from 2011 to 2015,
$11.2 billion (about 32 %) could be allocated to a specific country. Grants may benefit
multiple countries. As a result, figures do not add up to 100 percent.

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 19

ASIA & PACIFIC
KE Y FA C TS

ASIA & PACIFIC

64% of funding to Asia & Pacific came from
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
$6.6 B
$35.4 B (18.7%) Peace and Security funding to Asia & Pacific
total int’l
giving
more than tripled from 2011 to 2015.
2011-2015

17% 17% of funding went directly to local organizations

based in the country benefiting the grant in question.

FO U N DA TIO N GRANT DOLLARS, 2011- 2015 AV E R AG E G R AN T S I Z E , 2011- 20 1 5

Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$2 B $800 K $727.2 K
$1.7 B
$654.9 K

$1.5 B $1.4 B $600 K

$619.7 K
$1.2 B $492.9 K

$1 B $1.2 B
$1.1 B $400 K $429.8 K

$500 M $271.2 K
$200 K $226.4 K $231.8 K
$542.5 M $546.9 M $225.5 K
$495.0 M $183.7 K
$396.5 M $386.0 M

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

T O P FUNDE R S , 2011-2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 4.3 B 1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 977 grants

2. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $ 240.1 M 2. Ford Foundation 930 grants

3. Ford Foundation $ 217.8 M 3. Silicon Valley Community Foundation 565 grants

4. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation $ 190.8 M 4. Foundation to Promote Open Society 485 grants

5. The Rockefeller Foundation $ 162.1 M 5. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation 334 grants

Asia & Pacific includes the following countries: Afghanistan, Australia, Nauru, Nepal, New Zealand, North Korea, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New
Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Cook Islands, Fiji, Hong Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Sri
Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kiribati, Laos, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Tibet (autonomous region), Timor-Leste, Tonga,
Islands, Micronesia, Federated States of, Mongolia, Myanmar/Burma, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Vietnam.

20 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 INT ’L GIV IN G BY SUBJECT A REA , 20 1 1 -20 1 5 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$3.8 B $ 1.7 M +17.5%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

$1.1 B $ 520.5 K +89.4%

U.S.-BASED U.S.-BASED
ENVIRONMENT INTERMEDIARY INTERMEDIARY

$887.9 M $ 560.2 K -11.1% $3.5 B 5,958 grants

(53.1%) (52.1%)
EDUCATION

$513.5 M $ 224.8 K -42.0%

AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY

$752.3 M $ 1.5 M +90.1% NON-U.S.-BASED

INTERMEDIARY
HUMAN RIGHTS 1,250 grants (10.9%)
NON-U.S.-BASED
INTERMEDIARY
$300.0 M $ 259.8 K -1.1%
$2.0 B
(30.4%)
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
DIRECT
$340.3 M $ 927.3 K -13.3% 4,238 grants
(37.0%)
RELIGION
DIRECT
$64.5 M $ 157.7 K +94.3% $1.1 B (16.6%)

PEACE & SECURITY GENERAL SUPPORT

GENERAL SUPPORT DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS 338 grants (8.0% of DIRECT)
$49.8 M $ 301.7 K +241.4% $78.7 M (7.2% of DIRECT)

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. India $ 1.4 B
$2.4 B $ 977.1 K -4.5%

2. China $ 892.6 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$1.0 B $ 723.1 K +52.0%

3. Indonesia $ 217.2 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. Pakistan $ 207.4 M
$1.2 B $ 3.8 M -48.6%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Vietnam $ 195.8 M

$77.2 M $ 580.7 K -54.4%

6. Bangladesh $ 190.3 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$36.0 M $ 152.4 K +5.2% 7. Japan $ 134.4 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Myanmar $ 108.2 M

$55.4 M $ 194.9 K +102.1%
9. Cambodia $ 104.8 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$11.7 M $ 167.7 K +265.5% 10. Philippines $ 81.5 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 21

CARIBBEAN
K E Y FA C TS

CARIBBEAN
24% of funding to the Caribbean came from
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
$343.4 M
$35.4 B (1.0%) 91% of funding to the Caribbean was channeled
total int’l
91%
giving through U.S. organizations.
2011-2015

37% of funding to the Caribbean went to Haiti.

FO U N DA TIO N GRANT DOLLARS, 2011- 2015 AV E R AG E G R AN T S I Z E , 2011- 20 1 5

Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$100 M $300 K $275.4 K
$267.3 K
$81.8 M $83.1 M
$80 M $250 K
$68.3 M
$60.1 M $200 K $181.0 K
$60 M $165.3 K $168.9 K
$50.2 M
$56.3 M $58.0 M $150 K
$51.8 M $150.4 K $120.4 K $119.5 K
$40 M $47.9 M $48.4 M
$100 K $117.1 K $114.7 K
$20 M
$50 K

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

T O P FUNDE R S, 2011-2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 81.0 M 1. Johnson & Johnson Family of Companies Contribution Fund 164 grants

2. W. K. Kellogg Foundation $ 33.6 M 2. W. K. Kellogg Foundation 122 grants

3. The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation $ 20.3 M 3. Ford Foundation 88 grants

4. Ford Foundation $ 15.8 M 4. Foundation to Promote Open Society 73 grants

5. The PepsiCo Foundation, Inc. $ 11.1 M 5. Boston Foundation, Inc. 63 grants

Caribbean includes the following countries: Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Islands, Lesser Antilles, Martinique, Montserrat, Northern Saint-Martin,
Aruba, Bahama Islands, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, British Virgin Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines,
Islands, Cayman Islands, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Greater Saint-Barthélemy, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands,
Antilles, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Jamaica, Leeward Antilles, Leeward Windward Islands.

22 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 I NT’L GI V I N G B Y S U B J E C T A RE A , 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 5 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$153.0 M $ 402.6 K +94.2%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

$64.7 M $ 268.6 K -82.4%

ENVIRONMENT

$50.5 M $ 204.3 K -74.5%

EDUCATION
U.S.-BASED
$26.7 M $ 119.1 K +86.8% INTERMEDIARY U.S.-BASED
INTERMEDIARY
$313.4 M
AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY
(91.2%) 1,696 grants
$15.1 M $ 225.7 M +26.6% (89.1%)

HUMAN RIGHTS

$15.8 M $ 118.2 K +47.8%

SCIENCE & ENGINEERING

$17.5 M $ 178.5 K -1.0%

NON-U.S.-BASED
INTERMEDIARY
RELIGION NON-U.S.-BASED 55 grants (2.9%)
INTERMEDIARY
$2.8 M $ 34.5 K +47.4% $14.6 M (4.3%) DIRECT
153 grants (8.0%)
DIRECT $15.4 M (4.5%)
PEACE & SECURITY GENERAL SUPPORT
GENERAL SUPPORT
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
$415.0 K $ 69.2 K N/A $2.3 M (15.0% of DIRECT) 30 grants (19.6% of DIRECT)

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. Haiti $ 128.6 M
$42.7 M $ 113.5 K +140.8%

2. Cuba $ 13.9 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$46.8 M $ 338.9 K -16.2%

3. Bahamas $ 7.6 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. Dominican Republic $ 5.6 M
$1.9 M $ 71.0 M -80.0%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Jamaica $ 4.5 M

$19.8 M $ 250.5 K -47.3%

6. Bermuda $ 3.1 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$4.5 M $ 179.1 K -50.6% 7. Grenada $ 1.6 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Antigua and Barbuda $ 1.4 M

$2.0 M $ 217.1 K N/A
9. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines $ 1.2 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$1.4 M $ 127.7 K N/A 10. Trinidad and Tobago $ 1.1 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 23

EASTERN EUROPE, CENTRAL ASIA & RUSSIA
KEY FACTS

EASTERN EUROPE,
CENTRAL ASIA & RUSSIA Foundation to Promote Open Society
was the top funder, accounting for 33% of funding to

$570.2 M Eastern Europe, Central Asia & Russia.

$35.4 B (1.6%) 22% of giving to Eastern Europe, Central Asia & Russia
total int’l was for human rights, whereas just 5% of overall
giving giving is for human rights.
2011-2015

42% of funding to Eastern Europe, Central Asia & Russia

42%
went directly to local organizations.

FO UNDA TI O N G R A N T D O LLA R S , 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 5 A V E R A G E G R A N T S IZ E , 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 15
Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$200 M $350 K $333.4 K

$164.4 M $300 K
$327.8 K
$150 M $137.5 M
$161.3 M $250 K $223.6 K $220.9 K $211.8 K
$135.4 M $200 K $220.8 K
$90.6 M $93.8 M $163.4 K $211.8 K
$100 M $84.0 M $192.1 K
$150 K
$93.8 M $161.1 K
$82.5 M $77.8 M
$50 M $100 K

$50 K

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

TOP FUNDERS, 2011-2015

BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Foundation to Promote Open Society $ 185.6 M 1. Foundation to Promote Open Society 325 grants

2. Open Society Institute $ 77.7 M 2. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation 303 grants

3. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation $ 47.1 M 3. Open Society Institute 156 grants

4. Carnegie Corporation of New York $ 30.8 M 4. The Coca-Cola Foundation, Inc. 154 grants

5. The Coca-Cola Foundation, Inc. $ 29.5 M 5. Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc. 152 grants

Eastern Europe, Central Asia, & Russia includes the following countries: Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland,
Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,
Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

24 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 INT’L GIVING BY SUBJECT AREA, 2011-2015 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$51.4 M $ 171.9 K +51.6%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT U.S.-BASED

INTERMEDIARY U.S.-BASED
$60.1 M $ 174.2 K -14.1% $177.2 M INTERMEDIARY
(31.1%) 919 grants
ENVIRONMENT (37.3%)
$39.2 M $ 189.2 K -59.7%

EDUCATION
NON-U.S.-BASED NON-U.S.-BASED
$93.0 M $ 239.2 K +5.7% INTERMEDIARY INTERMEDIARY
$151.8 M 394 grants
AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY (26.6%) (16.0%)

$3.9 M $ 163.8 K -51.7%

HUMAN RIGHTS

$123.6 M $ 260.8 K +24.1% DIRECT DIRECT

$241.2 M 1,162 grants

SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
(42.3%) (47.1%)
$9.8 M $ 98.7 K +58.6%

RELIGION
GENERAL SUPPORT
$26.7 M $ 158.1 K -62.3% GENERAL SUPPORT
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
$65.5 M (27.2% of DIRECT) 260 grants (22.4% of DIRECT)
PEACE & SECURITY

$26.7 M $ 254.0 K +196.5%

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. Russia $ 119.9 M
$61.0 M $ 127.4 K +15.4%

2. Poland $ 46.6 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$19.4 M $ 150.0 K -42.9%

3. Ukraine $ 38.7 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. Hungary $ 34.6 M
$7.1 M $ 95.7 K -35.9%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Romania $ 33.5 M

$5.0 M $ 120.1 K -11.5%

6. Moldova $ 31.8 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$3.8 M $ 102.1 K -3.3% 7. Kyrgyz Republic $ 29.9 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Estonia $ 25.4 M

$3.4 M $ 96.8 K N/A
9. Serbia $ 24.1 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$936.4 K $ 52.0 K +42.6% 10. Slovakia $ 23.2 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 25

LATIN AMERICA & MEXICO
K E Y FA C TS

LATIN AMERICA & MEXICO

30% of funding to Latin America was for
environment programs.
$2.7 B
$35.4 B (7.7%) 8% of funding to Latin America was targeted at
total int’l
giving
indigenous populations.
2011-2015

29% of funding to Latin America was for Mexico.

FO U N DA TIO N GRANT DOLLARS, 2011- 2015 AV E R AG E G R AN T S I Z E , 2011- 20 1 5

Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$800 M $400 K
$385.1 K

$333.8 K $329.5 K
$625.0 M $361.8 K $308.3 K
$586.3 M $599.4 M
$600 M $300 K
$284.7 K
$580.3 M $475.1 M $289.7 K
$543.4 M $425.9 M
$247.9 K $256.9 K
$400 M $200 K
$378.4 M
$347.3 M $180.2 K
$316.0 M
$200 M $100 K

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

T O P FUNDE R S, 2011-2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 571.3 M 1. Ford Foundation 1,181 grants

2. Walton Family Foundation $ 342.2 M 2. Foundation to Promote Open Society 414 grants

3. Ford Foundation $ 252.5 M 3. W. K. Kellogg Foundation 362 grants

4. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $ 192.2 M 4. Citi Foundation 255 grants

5. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation $ 161.9 M 5. Seattle Foundation 228 grants

Included in Latin America & Mexico are the following countries: El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama,
Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela.

26 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 INT ’ L G I V I N G B Y SUBJE CT ARE A, 2011-2015 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$745.0 M $ 593.1 K +12.4%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

$450.7 M $ 235.9 K -35.2%

U.S.-BASED
ENVIRONMENT U.S.-BASED INTERMEDIARY

$809.8 M $ 396.0 K -23.3%

INTERMEDIARY
4,535 grants
$1.6 B (54.9%)
EDUCATION (60.7%)
$458.8 M $ 493.9 K -90.8%

AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY

$223.2 M $ 426.7 K +118.3%

NON-U.S.-BASED
INTERMEDIARY
HUMAN RIGHTS
805 grants
NON-U.S.-BASED
$350.2 M $ 205.7 K -3.8% (9.7%)
INTERMEDIARY
$518.7 M
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING (19.1%)

$46.4 M $ 194.8 K -87.5% DIRECT

DIRECT
2,919 grants
RELIGION (35.3%)
$547.6 M
$22.9 M $ 103.5 K -40.5% (20.2%)

PEACE & SECURITY GENERAL SUPPORT

GENERAL SUPPORT
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
$6.9 M $ 117.0 K -1.7% $29.9 M (5.5% of DIRECT) 161 grants (5.5% of DIRECT)

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. Mexico $ 782.8 M
$257.6 M $ 171.9 K +5.6%

2. Brazil $ 315.5 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$304.0 M $ 267.1 K +22.2%

3. Peru $ 151.7 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. Colombia $ 150.8 M
$23.4 M $ 189.8 K +535.2%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Ecuador $ 85.1 M

$17.9 M $ 140.9 K -27.2%

6. El Salvador $ 75.2 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$88.6 M $ 251.0 K -63.0% 7. Chile $ 64.1 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Guatemala $ 64.0 M

$209.5 M $ 200.8 K +23.8%
9. Bolivia $ 63.3 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$4.6 M $ 152.2 K +1357.5% 10. Honduras $ 57.6 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 27

MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA
K E Y FA CTS

MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA

25% of funding to MENA was for programs
focused on religion.
$1.7 B
$35.4 B (4.7%) Peace and Security funding to MENA
total int’l
giving 205% from 2011 to 2015.
grew by
2011-2015

74% of funding to MENA was for Israel.

FO U NDA TIO N GRANT DOLLARS, 2011- 2015 AV E R AG E G R AN T S I Z E , 2011- 20 1 5

Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$400 M $385.1 M $292.8 K
$300 K
$363.5 M $266.5 K
$348.6 M
$281.3 K $248.8 K
$367.4 M $250 K
$304.4 M $341.2 M $260.7 K
$339.7 M $214.3 K
$300 M
$264.9 M $195.8 K $236.3 K
$304.4 M
$200 K $214.3 K
$264.9 M $195.8 K
$200 M $150 K

$100 K
$100 M
$50 K

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

T O P FUNDE R S , 2011-2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Adelson Family Foundation $ 185.8 M 1. The Harry & Jeanette Weinberg Foundation Inc 318 grants

2. The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust $ 114.4 M 2. The Rosalinde and Arthur Gilbert Foundation 280 grants

3. Ford Foundation $ 69.0 M 3. Ford Foundation 269 grants

4. The Harry & Jeanette Weinberg Foundation Inc $ 64.8 M 4. Ted Arison Family Foundation USA, Inc. 237 grants

5. Ted Arison Family Foundation USA, Inc. $ 64.0 M 5. Foundation to Promote Open Society 227 grants

Middle East & North Africa includes the following countries: Algeria, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab
Bahrain, Cyprus, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Emirates, West Bank/Gaza Strip (Palestinian Territories), Yemen.

28 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 INT’L GIVING BY SUBJECT AREA, 2011-20 1 5 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$191.9 M $ 292.9 K +133.5%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

$78.1 M $ 158.1 K +5.5%

ENVIRONMENT
U.S.-BASED
$50.1 M $ 294.2 K -37.1% INTERMEDIARY
U.S.-BASED
$1.1 B INTERMEDIARY
EDUCATION
(65.1%) 5,079 grants
$380.5 M $ 263.3 K +16.9%
(74.1%)
AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY

$11.4 M $ 293.2 K +927.0%

HUMAN RIGHTS
NON-U.S.-BASED
$135.6 M $ 172.2 K +11.7% INTERMEDIARY
$181.2 M NON-U.S.-BASED
(10.9%) INTERMEDIARY
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
497 grants
$64.1 M (7.2%)
$ 281.2 K +130.2%
DIRECT
RELIGION $400.9 M DIRECT
(24.1%) 1,281 grants
$407.7 M $ 509.7 K -28.2% (18.7%)

PEACE & SECURITY GENERAL SUPPORT GENERAL SUPPORT

DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
$38.6 M $ 139.0 K +205.2% $35.3 M (8.8% of DIRECT) 157 grants (12.3% of DIRECT)

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. Israel $ 1.2 B
$339. 5 M $ 291.9 K +30.2%

2. Egypt $ 100.6 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$78.8 M $ 184.1 K -4.0%

3. Turkey $ 50.0 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. West Bank/Gaza (Palestinian Territories) $ 38.0 M
$57.1 M $ 145.3 K +30.3%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Iran $ 25.5 M

$11.0 M $ 324.8 K -90.0%

6. Lebanon $ 21.2 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$55.9 M $ 169.4 K +122.8% 7. Syria $ 20.4 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Jordan $ 18.8 M

$1.5 M $ 49.7 K +977.9%
9. Iraq $ 18.6 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$2.0 M $ 97.5 K -44.4% 10. Tunisia $ 16.5 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 29

SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
K E Y FA C TS

SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
72% of funding to Sub-Saharan Africa came from
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
$9.0 B
$35.4 B (25.4%) 23% of funding to Sub-Saharan Africa was for
total int’l
giving
agriculture and food security programs.
2011-2015

The average size of grants for Sub-Saharan Africa was

$910 K.

FO U N DA TIO N GRANT DOLLARS, 2011- 2015 AV E R AG E G R AN T S I Z E , 2011- 20 1 5

Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$2.5 B $1.2 M
$1.2 M
$2.2 B
$2 B $1 M
$2.1 B $2.0 B
$767.1 K $942.5 K $924.4 K
$800 K
$1.5 B $1.4 B $1.4 B
$735.6 K
$600 K
$1 B
$400 K
$345.9 K $366.9 K
$500 M $611.7 M $307.8 K
$597.4 M $200 K $256.6 K $255.3 K
$418.2 M $412.8 M $468.4 M

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

T O P FUNDE R S, 2011-2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 6.5 B 1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 1,709 grants

2. Howard G. Buffett Foundation $ 240.9 M 2. Ford Foundation 953 grants

3. Ford Foundation $ 232.4 M 3. The Rockefeller Foundation 347 grants

4. Foundation to Promote Open Society $ 202.2 M 4. Segal Family Foundation 325 grants

5. The Rockefeller Foundation $ 185.6 M 5. Silicon Valley Community Foundation 275 grants

Sub-Saharan Africa includes the following countries: Angola, Benin, Botswana, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania,
Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and
Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South
Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Republic of Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

30 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 I N T ’L G I V I N G B Y S U B J E C T A R E A , 2 0 1 1 -2 015 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$5.4 B $ 1.7 M +57.6%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

$1.5 B $ 760.8 K +30.0%

U.S.-BASED
INTERMEDIARY U.S.-BASED
ENVIRONMENT INTERMEDIARY
$4.6 B
$609.5 M $ 614.4 K -14.5%
(51.0%)
5,510 grants
(55.8%)
EDUCATION

$487.7 M $ 304.2 K +7.6%

AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY

$2.0 B $ 1.8 M +18.3%

HUMAN RIGHTS NON-U.S.-BASED

INTERMEDIARY
NON-U.S.-BASED
$473.6 M $ 311.6 K +76.4% INTERMEDIARY 1,900 grants
(19.3%)
$3.5 B
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING (38.6%)
$752.2 M $ 2.2 M -66.1%
DIRECT

RELIGION
2,459 grants
(24.9%)
$109.5 M $ 236.4 K +59.2% DIRECT
$930.4 M (10.4%)
PEACE & SECURITY GENERAL SUPPORT
GENERAL SUPPORT DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS 280 grants (11.4% of DIRECT)
$35.4 M $ 340.5 K +336.2% $48.6 M (5.2% of DIRECT)

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. Nigeria $ 1.0 B
$3.0 B $ 1.1 M +20.5%

2. Ethiopia $ 459.1 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$1.4 B $ 831.4 K +68.2%

3. South Africa $ 423.5 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. Kenya $ 406.3 M
$1.5 B $ 7.5 M -6.8%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Tanzania $ 343.0 M

$383.4 M $ 587.1 K +19.0%

6. Ghana $ 263.5 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$42.1 M $ 253.9 M -59.9% 7. Uganda $ 238.6 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Liberia $ 144.0 M

$25.8 M $ 228.8 K +863.1%
9. Congo, Democratic Republic of the $ 142.3 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$14.1 M $ 175.7 K +567.6% 10. Zambia $ 137.5 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 31

WESTERN EUROPE
K E Y FA C TS

WESTERN EUROPE
30% of funding to Western Europe went towards
health programs.
$2.0 B
$35.4 B (5.6%) 22% of funding to Western Europe was targeted at
total int’l
giving
children & youth.
2011-2015

35% 35% of funding to Western Europe went

directly to local organizations.

FO U N DA TIO N GRANT DOLLARS, 2011- 2015 AV E R AG E G R AN T S I Z E , 2011- 20 1 5

Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda Including the Bill & Melinda Excluding the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation Gates Foundation
$499.6 M
$500 M $500 M

$414.5 M $424.1 K
$400 M $376.1 M $376.6 M $400 M
$343.3 K
$311.7 M
$367.5 M $283.0 K
$300 M $300 M $276.7 K
$299.5 M
$273.7 M $285.1 M $221.9 K $270.7 K
$200 M $200 M
$249.5 K
$224.5 M $214.5 K $210.7 K
$196.1 K

$100 M $100 M

0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

T O P FUNDE R S, 2011-2015
BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS

1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $ 529.0 M 1. John Templeton Foundation 544 grants

2. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $ 179.6 M 2. The Bank of America Charitable Foundation, Inc. 303 grants

3. The Oak Foundation U.S.A. $ 94.3 M 3. State Street Foundation, Inc. 266 grants

4. John Templeton Foundation $ 81.8 M 4. The JPMorgan Chase Foundation 245 grants

5. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation $ 74.6 M 5. Silicon Valley Community Foundation 229 grants

Western Europe includes the following countries: Andorra, Austria, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway,
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Portugal, San Marino, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom.

32 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 I NT’ L GIVING BY SU B J E C T ARE A, 2 0 1 1 - 2 015 INT’L GIVING BY CHANNELS OF GIVING, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE BY DOLLAR AMOUNT BY NUMBER OF GRANTS
HEALTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015
$601.7 M $ 701.3 K +204.4%

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
U.S.-BASED
U.S.-BASED INTERMEDIARY
$209.8 M $ 308.1 K +195.9%
INTERMEDIARY 2,195 grants
$578.9 M (33.7%)
ENVIRONMENT
(29.3%)
$331.4 M $ 689.1 K -68.6%

EDUCATION
NON-U.S.-BASED
$365.0 M $ 228.4 K +49.1% INTERMEDIARY
NON-U.S.-BASED 762 grants (11.7%)
INTERMEDIARY
AGRICULTURE & FOOD SECURITY $177.0 M (8.9%)
$50.4 M $ 573.1 K +7.0%

HUMAN RIGHTS
DIRECT
$92.9 M $ 225.0 K +101.0% DIRECT 3,409 grants
$694.4 M (52.4%)
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
(35.1%)
$109.6 M $ 238.8 K -37.3%

RELIGION

$32.8 M $ 134.0 K -78.4% GENERAL SUPPORT

GENERAL SUPPORT DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS
DIRECT TO LOCAL ORGS 641 grants (18.8% of DIRECT)
PEACE & SECURITY $107.2 M (15.4% of DIRECT)

$13.3 M $ 246.1 K +13.7%

INT’L GIVING BY POPULATION FOCUS, 2011-2015 TOP COUNTRIES BY GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS, 2011-2015
AVERAGE % CHANGE
CHILDREN & YOUTH
GRANT SIZE 2011-2015 1. United Kingdom $ 598.7 M
$436.0 M $ 392.1 K +90.2%

2. Germany $ 107.6 M
WOMEN & GIRLS

$56.5 M $ 302.2 K +134.6%

3. France $ 74.9 M

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

4. Switzerland $ 63.4 M
$247.7 M $ 1.0 M -32.5%

PEOPLE WITH HIV/AIDS 5. Italy $ 63.4 M

$8.2 M $ 341.6 M +710.1%

6. Austria $ 26.6 M
MIGRANTS & REFUGEES

$38.2 M $ 174.3 M +97.0% 7. Spain $ 26.2 M

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 8. Netherlands $ 23.4 M

$5.6 M $ 205.8 M +177.3%
9. Belgium $ 22.0 M
LGBTQ PEOPLE

$1.9 M $ 112.9 M +695.9% 10. Denmark $ 21.1 M

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 33

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS
I N TE RNATIO NA L G IVING BY SUSTAIN ABLE DE V E LOP M E N T G OAL, 2011–2015
% CHANGE FROM 2011-2015
$1.2 B +50.3%

$3.6 B +53.4%

$17.0 B +37.8%

$2.8 B -31.4%

$4.9 B +80.3%

$971.5 M -30.6%

$791.6 M -40.0%

$2.9 B +27.1%

$1.4 B -7.8%

$248.9 M +45.9%

$1.2 B +2.0%

$652.5 M +24.7%

$827.9 M -22.3%

$383.1 M +18.2%

$2.1 B +48.3%

$3.5 B +3.9%

$643.0 M -30.9%

Achieving the SDGs requires more than just governments and the price foundations are already working globally to address issues and topics across
tag is high—experts estimate it will cost more than $4 trillion per year the goals, such as alleviating hunger and investing in quality education. By
from 2015 to 2030. Foundations are already beginning to partner linking their existing programs and aligning future strategies with the SDG
with UN agencies, the private sector, civil society, and government to framework, U.S. foundations working globally can join important conversations
leverage their resources and work collectively to changing the world by on how best to achieve more effective development outcomes for all.
2030 in order to truly “leave no one behind.”
Learn more about how foundations
Foundation Center estimates that foundations will spend at least
are supporting the Sustainable
$364 B on the SDGs between 2015 and 2030 and are on track to Development Goals on
possibly surpass that estimate. This data shows that many U.S. sdgfunders.org

34 FOUNDATION CENTER AND THE COUNCIL ON FOUNDATIONS

 O FFI C IA L DE VE LOPM EN T ASSISTAN CE BY S U STAI N ABLE DE V E LOP M E N T G OAL, 2 0 1 1 – 2 0 1 5
% CHANGE FROM 2011-2015
$71.6 B +1.1%

$60.5 B +12.1%

$120.0 B +4.4%

$71.4 B -13.1%

$3.7 B -24.3%

$39.7 B -0.7%

$52.7 B +17.3%

$50.5 B +7.1%

$18.6 B +6.8%

$2.1 B -0.6%

$113.2 B +49.3%

$2.1 B +20.0%

$8.8 B +130.3%

$7.1 B -14.5%

$29.1 B -16.4%

$102.6 B -10.8%

$19.9 B -19.3%

Why report on funding by SDGs before the goals went into effect?

The SDGs formally did not go into effect until January 2016. Still, • How did foundation funding for SDGs differ from ODA from 2011 to 2015?
the distribution of foundation funding by SDGs during the five year
• Based on this, which goals will be strategic areas for foundations to focus
period before will serve as a baseline for tracking U.S. philanthropic
on going forward?
efforts toward the achievement of the global goals.
• Were there strategic reasons for the distribution of funding from 2011 to
Foundations should consider the following in reviewing the figures:
2015? If so, why, and do the same strategic considerations still hold true?

THE STATE OF GLOBAL GIVING BY U.S. FOUNDATIONS, 2011–2015 35