Giving with Passion: The New Philanthropists

Steven Burrill Donations to scientists and scientific projects today often take on a personal flavor. Many relatively young and wealthy entrepreneurs direct their dollars to scientific causes that tap into personal concerns and strongly felt and articulated visions. "I ... [feel] passionately about ... science and technology and the need to build an economy and a society based around science and technology. I believe the education system by and large has not been keeping up in providing our young people the excitement to be in science and technology or the skills to do that," says Steven Burrill, the 54-year-old CEO of Burrill & Co., a merchant bank in San Francisco. "I don't see a lot of kids wanting to grow up to be Bill Gates. And that bothers me. So my passion for that causes me to give where that passion is." Burrill recently gave "in excess of $50,000" (he declined to reveal the exact amount) to help fund Internet access for the Exploratorium, an internationally known science center in San Francisco. "It's a case where I saw an extraordinary opportunity to reach a much broader populace. Put the Exploratorium on the Net and you have worldwide impact," he says. William Heckrodt also talks of giving money to help researchers implement his personal vision. The retired corporate vice president from Menasha, Wis., donated $2 million to the University of Wisconsin, Madison, to fund research on hybrid poplars. "My primary purpose is to make a difference," he says, arguing that fast-growing poplars can have a significant environmental impact. They absorb large amounts of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide and can be used as fuel. Heckrodt's interest in funding this research stems from his own rocky experience some 20 years ago in developing the trees. "I made mistakes and suffered losses. I never made any money." Like Burrill, Heckrodt is passionate about his philanthropy: "In my early experiments we ran into a lot of skeptical people. We still run into a lot of skeptical people, so we have to be passionate about it to keep [ourselves] going." While she doesn't speak in terms of passion, Catherine Muther, who founded and now heads the Three Guineas Foundation, uses her philanthropy to further her own deeply felt concerns. "We're looking for strategic opportunities where there has historically not been [equal] access for women and girls, where ... we as a small foundation might influence change," says Muther, who five years ago, at 46, left her job as vice president for marketing at Cisco Systems to focus on philanthropy. Catherine Muther Helping women get money to start their own companies--specifically information technology (IT) companies--is one goal of the foundation. "Women historically have not had the same opportunity to access capital [as men], and it is a barrier to their ability to create and build technology companies," she says. To change that, the foundation is helping to fund The Women's Technology Incubator, which provides reduced rent, mentoring, and financing for small women-owned IT firms in San Francisco. Such efforts are typical in many ways of what Jaleh Daie,1 professor of biology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and president of the Women in Science & Technology Alliance, and others have described as the new breed of philanthropists. "We see ourselves as agents of change. The new breed uses purse power and/or professional talents to bring about what we consider positive change," she says. Another difference is their pace is faster than customary in the world of grantmaking. "It's focusing on results rather than process." "I think Jaleh's right. People [from the world of technology and innovation] are impatient with [long, drawn-out] processes. They tend to ... behave [the same] in their business and personal life and want institutions to do that as well," agrees Burrill. In the entrepreneurial world, "People take great science or technology and a lot of intuition and do things." While such an approach may seem almost haphazard, Burrill says it definitely isn't. "It's not a crap shoot. It's where your passion is. It's where your network is. It isn't a business school case study," he argues. Heckrodt also disdains the idea of a long grant review process, bemoaning the time and effort researchers have to expend to get money. "It's surprising that there are as many people as there are [applying] for grants." Similarly Muther shies away from a highly detailed process. "I'm a niche player, and I can be nimble and quick and strategic and not burdened by process. I wouldn't be able to survive if I had a lot of process--staff people reviewing hundreds of evaluations, doing site visits," she says. "I'm highly specialized. I have a very specific focus and I need to keep that focus; otherwise, I can't be effective," she explains. But Muther does take an organized approach. In funding the incubator, she enlisted a range of donors in the San Francisco area to add to the funds her foundation was contributing. "To make it successful, we needed partners. We needed to have the business community, for example, step forward and say, 'We care that this happens and we're going to invest in this.' And likewise the philanthropic sector and the city," she says. The City of San Francisco put in $250,000, and a number of major corporations, including the Bank of America, PG&E, and Pacific Bell also gave, as did some local law firms. She also notes that women-owned firms seeking space in the incubator are screened and have to supply a business plan. The Society for Women's Health Research is another new philanthropic entrant. Started by Florence Haseltine, director of the Center for Population Research at NIH, the society is focusing on a specific research niche. "We picked a small area for which there is a known need: studying gender differences. We'll be looking for ... the way cardiovascular drugs are metabolized in women differently from in men," says Haseltine, who has not used a personal fortune to start the society but sought donations. And she hopes to stimulate other groups and agencies to fund such research. Like the Three Guineas Foundation, the society seeks partnerships. In this case, it's Pfizer Inc. of New York. Together they are offering three $195,000 three-year grants. Each grant will pay $65,000 annually. "Pfizer is trying to shift the paradigm of what women's health has traditionally meant: reproductive health in the minds of most," says Ruth Merkatz, director of women's health at Pfizer. "We decided to promote more research in women's health, and this is our initiative to do that." The grants focus on cardiovascular disease, mental health, and reproductive physiology. She notes that Pfizer hopes that new drugs for such disorders can come out of this research. This approach is emblematic of a new thrust in drug development--targeting pharmaceuticals for specific populations and gender. Though giving money in what could be viewed as a more traditional way--endowing a university professorship--Sara Lee Schupf is also a new strategic philanthropist. Using her personal earnings from the company that bears her name, which her father started, she endowed a chair for women in science at Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, NY. While she does not want to disclose the amount of money she has given, she does say it's been a major commitment. Conforming with the notion of strategic philanthropy, she sees this chair, currently held by astrophysicist Mary Crone, as a model to encourage others to give money for similar positions. As a donor, Schupf acknowledges it can be difficult to decide who gets money. An alumna and board member of Skidmore, her decision to fund a chair there was rather easy. "A lot of times it may be who's asking, how committed they are, and what their goals are," she says. Pfizer Inc. * www.pfizer.com/pfizerinc/philanthropy William F. Heckrodt Program for Fiber Crop Development and Utilization, Glen Stanosz, Director * E-mail: grs@plantpath.wisc.edu Women in Science & Technology Alliance * www.wistalliance.org Evaluating the results of her gifts isn't easy either. "That's the toughest [part] of giving." At Skidmore she talks of an increase in the number of students interested in science. "To have this young woman role model [Crone] is great. She's been a tremendous force on the Skidmore campus," says Schupf. And Heckrodt doesn't remove himself from the research he funds. He spends time talking with campus scientists whose work is funded by the William F. Heckrodt Program for Fiber Crop Development and Utilization. He does, however, note that his comments aren't always received as well as he would like. "Scientists have their own ideas. It's enjoyable [to talk with them] but it's frustrating to have suggested something and not have it followed up," he says. That there is a new cohort of philanthropists with definite goals in mind is clear. It remains to be seen whether their desire to change the way things are done and place money with their passions has the effect they seek. As in science, it's the results that are important. Harvey Black (73773.2227@compuserve.com) is a freelance science writer in Madison, Wis. J. Daie, "The changing face of philanthropy: what for science?" The Scientist, 13[5]:11, March 1, 1999.

Giving with Passion: The New Philanthropists

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of