Quixote, We Hardly Even Knew Ya!

“He was spurred on by the conviction that
the world needed his immediate presence.”
– Miguel de Cervantes, Don Quixote

For 400 years, Don Quixote has stood as one of the most influential works of Western literature. The official lifespan of the Quixote Foundation, named after Miguel de Cervantes‘ whimsical character, will be only 20 years, but the foundation’s leaders hope that its impact will be as eternal.

They are, you see, choosing to go out of business.

I only became aware of the Quixote Foundation — based in Seattle and with current assets of approximately $16 million — a few weeks ago, through their thoughtful response to an item I posted on Twitter. Clicking through to their website, I was immediately drawn in by a number of things:

• History: The Quixote Foundation was started in 1997 by Arthur “Stuart” Hanisch, who was born into a prominent, wealthy family but spent most of his life — and money — championing civil rights and a range of social and environmental causes. Since Mr. Hanisch’s death in 2002, the Foundation has been steered by a very small group of board and staff members, including his son, Erik, and daughter-in-law, Lenore.

• Focus: The Foundation’s mission is a simple but profound one — to see free people in fair societies on a healthy planet. Toward that end, the Foundation has focused its grantmaking in four areas of interest: media reform, election integrity, reproductive rights, and environmental equity.

• Style: Everything about the Foundation’s public presence — its web site design, the writing style of its Tiltings dispatches — embodies the whimsical, unassuming, idealistic nature of its namesake, definitely departing from the, well, stuffy style one often finds associated with family foundations. The modesty and understatement of the founder and the Foundation is further underscored by the use of the nom de plume “Don” for all of the organization’s writings.

Over the few weeks since I became aware of the Quixote Foundation, I’ve had a few interactions with “Don” through the Foundation’s Twitter account, @QuixoteTilts, including mutual retweets and comments back and forth. For several days last week, I didn’t notice anything from them in my Twitter stream. Then on Monday, I came across this fairly nonchalant tweet:

Following the link brought me to an entirely new section of Quixote’s web site, dedicated to the Foundation’s decision to make the most of its assets and maximize its impact by spending its entire endowment between now and 2017. In what some might dismiss as semantics but I see as indicative of the Foundation’s unique perspective, Quixote has characterized its decision as spending up, rather than spending out or down.

The attractive, interactive addition to the site and the newest edition of Tiltings provide clear and thoughtful explanations of the decision, how it was arrived at, and how the money will be spent. Quixote also recognizes the inspiration that it drew from the decisions of several other foundations to spend everything — including the Albert A. List Foundation, Atlantic Philanthropies, Beldon Fund, Brainerd Foundation, and the French American Charitable Trust — and provides a list of resources that other foundations might find helpful in considering their spending strategy. In the wake of Quixote’s announcement, there are hints that even more foundations may be following suit. “Getting email from other foundations that will spend everything but haven’t announced yet,” the Foundation tweeted on Tuesday.

In the course of writing this piece, I reached out to Quixote and was delighted to be in touch with Keneta Anderson, strategic consultant to the Foundation. Having been a part of the Quixote “family” for more than six years, Keneta quickly deepened my understanding of the Foundation’s enlightened approach:

When we talk about ROI, it stands for ‘Return on Idealism’.

The Foundation emphasizes that the decision to spend up reflects founder Stuart Hanisch’s belief that the donor’s role is secondary to what organizations and people do “on the ground”, and that its imperative is to be the most effective change agent possible, even if it means ceasing to exist as an institutional entity. As Lenore Hanisch, Co-Executive Director of the Foundation, communicated to me:

My father-in-law wanted the foundation to be a gift, not a burden. He left us completely free to decide what the mission and spending model would be. We’d love to see the whole sector set up in a way that foundations are able to have that conversation based on what the current opportunities are.

It is Quixote’s hope that its grantees will benefit more from up-front funding than from smaller grants over a longer period of time, and that a conscious focus on the sector’s capacity can maximize social impact. Co-Executive Director June Wilson helped me understand that Quixote will also be putting its mouth where its money goes:

We plan to talk really frankly with collaborators about using this concentrated resource to get in front of policies and issues now, so problems are avoided long term. One reason we’re making our decision public early is to work with grantees on building the capacities they see as most important. We also plan to convene and help weave a network of leaders who think collectively about how their work impacts the whole, so decisions made in one interest area strengthen the others too.

I applaud the Quixote Foundation’s bold and selfless decision, and I look forward to following its story — and its impact — over the next seven years and beyond. As was Don Quixote when he made the decision to leave his village and take up knighthood, it is clear that the Foundation is “spurred on by the conviction that the world [needs its] immediate presence.”

What are your thoughts on the decision of Quixote — and other foundations — to spend up?