Artis Stevens, the CEO of Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, received a call from MacKenzie Scott’s team in 2022 that was so thrilling—and unexpected—that it caused him to break into an impromptu dance in his kitchen. “My two daughters, who were 12 and 14 at the time, walked in and then started screaming to my wife, ‘Mom, there’s something wrong with Dad!’” noted Stevens in a recent study analyzing the impacts of Scott’s donations.
The Tampa, Fla.-based nonprofit, which received $25 million from the philanthropist two years ago, is one of the more than 2,000 organizations transformed by the philanthropist’s $19 billion worth of grants over the past five years, according to a report from The Center for Effective Philanthropy (CEP). Besides frequently surprising grant recipients, who are typically selected via quiet research, the billionaire’s grants have long been differentiated by their vast size and unrestricted nature.
Scott, who was formerly married to Amazon (AMZN) founder Jeff Bezos, in 2019 pledged to give her vast fortune away to charity. The median size of her gifts is around $5 million, with nearly half of grantees focused on social justice areas, according to the study, which surveyed the leaders of hundreds of organizations that received gifts from Scott between 2020 and early 2024.
“The way that Scott gave these gifts is there was no time limit in which they had to be spent, and so that meant that folks could really budget strategically,” Elisha Smith Arrillaga, CEP’s vice president of research and co-author of the study, told Observer.
Nearly 90 percent of surveyed nonprofit leaders said the grant either moderately or significantly strengthened their organization’s long-term financial sustainability. Around 60 percent intend to spend the grant over the next two to five years, with only 15 percent having already used up the funds.
The gifts also made a huge difference on the individual level, with more than one third of surveyed leaders saying the grants reduced their level of burnout. Nearly 40 percent said Scott’s donation resulted in them intending to stay in their current role for a longer period of time.
Surprise gifts sometimes cause unexpected challenges
Ninety percent of the surveyed organization leaders reported no negative consequences linked to Scott’s grant, according to the report. However, around 17 percent said they encountered minor challenges related to the use or receipt of her donation, while 2 percent dealt with major issues.
This last category, which contained 20 nonprofits in total, was most often related to managing relationships with other funders after receiving Scott’s gift. In some cases, the philanthropist’s generosity caused other funders to perceive recipients as no longer needing additional grants.
Despite the largely positive impacts of Scott’s philanthropy, 52 percent of surveyed foundation leaders conceded that they haven’t followed her lead and should be providing more unrestricted, large support than they currently are. Nearly one third of this group said they are exploring such changes, while others noted their foundations are too small or could suffer financial risk if such funds are committed.
But following Scott’s exact methods, at least when it comes to grant size, isn’t realistic. “One of the things that happen so often when we present this data is people are like, oh my god, that was a lot of money,” said Smith Arrillaga. “It’s not necessarily the amount that she gave, but it’s the how.”
Going forward, she is hopeful that more philanthropists will take Scott’s strategies into consideration and place more trust in nonprofit leaders. “It can’t be understated, the powerful and transformative effects this kind of giving had on organizations,” said Smith Arrillaga.
<