The following data has been extracted from the Giving Australia 2016 Philanthropy and philanthropists report. The full report is available for free download.

Giving Australia 2016 tells us that the desire to give strategically to create a long term, financially sustainable giving channel is a key factor. Some philanthropists move from a mostly spontaneous approach to a more planned and structured approach by way of a philanthropic giving vehicle.

The most common legal structure (adopted by 33% of respondents to the Philanthropy and philanthropists survey) was a Private Ancillary Fund (PAF), followed by charitable trusts and sub-funds.

PAFs tended to be established by people who had the resources and the inclination to establish and manage their own fund.

Sub-funds of umbrella organisations such as community foundations were established by people with smaller capital amounts to give or by those who preferred their giving to be part of a collective endeavour. Some opted for both.

Those who use structured giving vehicles thought it made their giving:

• more strategic
• sharply focused and with greater impact
• more financially sustainable, and
• better planned around personal and/or business needs.

Foundations, trusts and ancillary funds also allowed for control over where money was spent and had potential for tax incentives.

Giving Australia 2016 participants recommend several actions to grow structured giving, such as:

• reduce the complexity involved in establishing a structured giving vehicle
• reduce restrictions on where donations can be made (e.g. enable PAFs to gift beyond Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR)1s, inclusive of individuals)
• establish mechanisms to encourage sharing of administration (back-office)
• increase awareness and skills among solicitors and financial advisers, and
• support foundations to leverage the relative freedom they have to take risks with their money

The following data has been extracted from the Giving Australia 2016 Philanthropy and philanthropists report. The full report is available for free download.

The top three issues/areas to which survey respondents directed their grantmaking were:

• social services (63.7%)
• education and research (62.7%), and
• health (52.9%).

The majority of respondents (81.4%) reported having a process to review their grantmaking priorities.

Just over half (53.9%) of respondents indicated the grantmaking processes of their fund(s) have changed significantly over the past 10 years.

The top three influences over granting choices were:

• alignment with personal passions
• sound governance in the receiving organisation, and
• perceived competence of the charity.

The level of due diligence of organisations or causes undertaken by donors differed with the size of a gift.

Reporting and evaluation were seen by many as having an important role to play in considering repeat funding with respondents noting that:

• reporting and evaluation processes required adequate resourcing of skills and time, and
• some projects have much longer-term outcomes or indirect benefits that are difficult to measure.

Just under half (46.9%) of respondents stated that their fund has conducted an evaluation of its own effectiveness.