On 19th November members of the North West Philanthropy Network met at The Portico Library in Central Manchester to discuss the theme of legacy in philanthropy – how the idea of legacy is changing and what means for donors, charities and families now and in the future.
The discussion was shaped by thoughts from contributors Tasnim Khalid, Managing Partner at Private Client Solicitors and board member of The Charity Commission, Rhodri Davies Founding Director of Why Philanthropy Matters and Research Fellow at the University of Kent and Thom Keep, CEO and Librarian of The Portico Library.
The discussion was wide ranging and the following themes emerged:-
- Legacy is more than a gift in a will
Participants emphasised that legacy increasingly refers to:
- Values passed down within families
- A desire to transmit purpose to younger generations
- How people want to be remembered, not only financially but relationally and socially
- The wish to “step back” but still enable meaningful impact
Legacy is becoming a living concept, not just a future transaction. This is a change from historical approaches.
- Shifts in next-generation philanthropy
Emerging donors tend to:
- See giving as holistic and values-led
- Prioritise personal meaning and emotional connection
- Want visibility of impact rather than traditional forms of recognition
- Care more about authenticity and less about status
- Be more comfortable with anonymity when it supports impact
This marks a shift away from philanthropy as reputation-building and toward philanthropy as purpose-building.
- Family dynamics and generational differences
The roundtable highlighted diverse family approaches:
- Some involve children early, using philanthropy to model values
- Others prefer to manage giving privately without involving the next generation
- Each generation often interprets legacy differently
- Families may be negotiating trust, responsibility, and stewardship of wealth
These dynamics shape how and why individuals and families choose to give and can involve the complexities that are inherent in all personal relationships.
- Recognition and “naming” are evolving
Key reflections included:
- Traditional social credit linked to naming rights is declining
- Organisations are increasingly cautious about reputational risks attached to names. This can go both ways with donors feeling potentially exposed when attaching their name to public buildings or spaces
- Donors want recognition to feel purposeful, not performative
- Anonymous giving is becoming more common among impact-focused individuals
- Many charities report that naming can be useful for them to highlight the role of philanthropic giving in their funding and to encourage others to give
Recognition now needs to reflect shared values rather than hierarchy and needs to serve the needs and wants of both the donor and the recipient organisation.
- Human stories matter more than numbers
Across the discussion, as is often the case when thinking about philanthropy, there was a strong emphasis on:
- Relationship-building
- Trust
- Emotional connection
- Lived experiences and stories
- Clear articulation of purpose
Impact remains important, but many donors want to understand the human side of that impact. This is also true for funders who are custodians of inherited wealth many of whom refer to the original founder and their values and intentions when deciding which projects to fund.
- Language and framing are shifting
Participants noted a move away from traditional philanthropic language:
- Terms like “impact,” “investment,” “social change,” and “community benefit” may resonate more with younger and more entrepreneurial donors
- However for some this language can “muddy the waters” and move away from a more altruistic mindset
- Conversations framed around purpose and meaning can engage donors better than transactional language
- Some people want to understand the feeling their giving creates, not just the output
The sector is seeing a linguistic shift towards values and shared purpose but we need to consider the effect that has on charities who may feel pressure to frame their work in “impact-friendly” ways.
- Endowment vs spend-down approaches
Different models of legacy giving were discussed:
- Some donors prefer finite giving — once funds are spent, the work is complete
- Others favour endowment-style models that create long-term sustainability
- Preferences often reflect family philosophy, generational attitudes, and perceptions of stewardship
There is an inherent tension between the two approaches. Historically those who have followed an endowment model have a longer-lasting reputation (e.g. Andrew Carnegie). However there is an argument that charities need funding now and holding onto endowments prevents the flow of funding to where it is needed most. But if endowments are spent then future donors need to step into that funding gap.
The discussion made clear that legacy in philanthropy is not a static or single idea but a dynamic, values-driven and deeply personal concept. Everyone has different views on what legacy means to them and different approaches can coexist even within the same family or trust. However at its heart there is a shared desire to do good in the world and that can only be a good thing for charities and the communities they serve.
To find out more about the North West Philanthropy Network you can email [email protected]
