Scaling a business in the US can feel like a maze.
Each state has its own payroll benefits and compliance rules, pulling your focus away from growth, which is why founders use DEAL.
DEAL is the Professional Employer Organization, or PEO, that gives you a dedicated HR expert plus Fortune 500 level benefits for your team.
The National Association of PEOs says businesses can grow twice as fast if they use one.
So if you're scaling, make it simple with Deal.
Go to deel.com slash MOS and get up to three months free.
Your company's data is everywhere, in systems, in silos, and across teams.
But if your AI can't reach it, then that data isn't working for you.
Every business has unique data.
What really makes a difference is how you use it.
IBM helps your AI access your data wherever it lives to change how you do business.
Let's create smarter business.
IBM.
We've just never seen something this nasty.
The anger, the kind of feeling that none of this aid matters.
It's deeply disturbing to people you know really of any ideology, because they don't see that there is an ideology.
If you were motivated to want to be a nonprofit or philanthropy worker, why would you do that after somebody has made it sound like it's the dirtiest profession ever?
Rather than a call to public service?
That's Stacey Palmer, the CEO of The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
The world of public service is in turmoil, with President Trump's dramatic cuts to US government grants, traumatizing nonprofits and foundations and destabilizing a swath of civic society.
I wanted to talk to Stacey to better understand the on the ground realities for organizations that suddenly find themselves in the new administration's crosshairs.
We talk about the unfolding battle over funding, how it's reshifting nonprofit priorities, the impact on corporate giving and whether the private sector can take the place of government support.
The president's recent address to Congress included harsh examples of alleged waste in grantmaking, but there's still broad uncertainty about Trump's overarching philosophy about nonprofits.
So let's get to it.
I'm Bob Safian, and this is Rapid Response.
I'm Bob Safian.
I'm here with Stacey Palmer, CEO at The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Stacey, thanks for joining us.
Delighted to join you.
Thousands of not-for-profits, aid groups, universities, hospitals rely on government grants.
The Trump administration has targeted that aid, first announcing a full-on freeze of grants and loans in late January, later rescinded, but many subsequent cuts.
Then, in his recent address to Congress, He name-checked a litany of what he'd framed as wasteful, absurd grants.
What's going on?
What is the mood like in the philanthropy world?
Is it anger?
Is it fear?
Are there any cheers?
Non-profits and foundations are mostly terrified for a lot of different reasons.
One is about just the philosophy of cutting off this aid.
One is about the direct impact on their organizations.
The other is that there's fear for the safety of their staffs, a lot of concern about whether all of this targeting of nonprofits might lead to physical or cybersecurity or other kinds of threats.
So I would say most people in the nonprofit world are in a very bad state, worse than I've seen before in my history of covering these organizations.
And worse than it was in the Reagan administration when we saw a lot of cuts.
Even the conservatives, who feel strongly about cutting government and see that there's waste, are very upset about the fact that this seems so haphazard that there's not a philosophy of the idea that we should ask philanthropy to take up the charge and we should be organized about how we think about that.
This all seems very random.
It comes, it goes.
It means that nonprofits can't make payroll.
It means that foundations can't figure out what the smartest strategy is to do.
So it's a pretty rough time in the nonprofit and foundation world.
I mean, beyond the funding, you mentioned concerns for physical safety.
Are there examples of that or stories of that?
Are you just hearing that from certain kinds of organizations?
I've talked to several grantmakers who said that the first request they're getting for extra funding is to beef up security, and that organizations that deal with the most controversial issues immigrants, LGBTQ rights, those kinds of things feel threatened.
They say that they're concerned about doxing.
And I don't have any examples, but I can't tell whether they're withholding the examples because of fear.
Things are moving so fast.
I mean, there have been lawsuits filed to challenge the administration.
It's hard to follow all the back and forth.
I know you guys have launched special coverage to try to keep up with the Trump agenda as it moves around.
Is money still flowing, but nobody knows for how long, or has it been cut off?
And is that what we're talking about, like a faucet being turned all the way off?
Some groups, even though a court said you know, the money has to keep flowing, they say that the money isn't flowing and that they've suffered freezes.
Environmental groups, for example, say that they can't figure out what's going on with their banks not releasing money the money to them and so there have been disputes over that.
So it's not that no aid is flowing.
I think some is, but it's in no organized way that you can figure out.
Why is it coming from some agencies and not, and when you think about it, all the federal workers who have been laid off?
Those are the people who would turn on the spigots and make sure that things are flowing and happening.
Well, you can't call the person in the federal government who you used to call.
They're not there anymore.
I'm curious that the the morning of that first freeze memo in early January, like where were you?
How did you react?
Did you did you sense that this was like the start of something very different?
Yes, absolutely.
We knew that things were going to be different than they were in the first Trump term, which really rattled nonprofits in a lot of ways.
But it was clear this was different.
The part that was most striking to me was how quickly nonprofits responded.
They took the federal government to court right away.
They worked through the night.
As soon as they heard about it, they were taking action.
That is incredibly unusual in the nonprofit world.
And honestly, you know, they work in the arts.
They work in the environment.
They work in religion.
They don't. always have coalitions that are very strong and agile.
But in this case, they did.
And they were quickly able to persuade the courts to say, wait a minute, halt.
This is not something that really conforms to the law.
And so far, they have had quite a few victories in court.
There's still more to come, but they have been winning.
When you refer to the Trump administration's philosophy behind their actions.
I'm curious how you would describe the sort of role of philanthropy and of nonprofit organizations overall in our economy and our societies.
One of the things that people don't really understand is they see billionaires who are incredibly wealthy and they see them giving away money.
People like Bill and Melinda Gates, Warren Buffett and the dollars are striking.
They're more than any of us could think about giving, but they are tiny compared to what the federal government spends.
You know, the Gates Foundation could spend all of the money in its coffers and it would just keep government operating, maybe for a day.
You know, it's just the scale is quite, quite different.
So it's very important to understand the role that government plays.
And it's twofold.
One is direct funding of nonprofits.
The second is when the federal government and the state and local governments pull back.
There are more people in need.
That means they turn to nonprofits for extra help.
So often.
What happens in these cutbacks is not just that the nonprofits lose the support they need to provide services, but they have more people at their doors.
So you know the scale of what philanthropy can do versus the federal government is really important to understand.
Now, that's not to say that philanthropy can't pick up more.
There has been enormous run up in wealth, as we all know.
There are many billionaires who could give very generously and make a difference.
So nonprofits are certainly calling on them.
And calling on the nation's foundations Ford Rockefeller, all the names that you all know asking them to step up.
But it would be foolish to think that any private entities can make up for what the government's doing.
And so, just just to play devil's advocate, like for profit businesses, the private sector, wealthy individuals, they can't enable all of this work.
It has to fall on the government to be the funder.
I think there could be a shift in the proportion, for sure, that comes from wealthy individuals.
So there are some ways to go at it.
I think even the biggest defenders of government would say there are some programs that aren't really as efficient as they ought to be and it's time to reexamine this.
I think everybody's open to that.
But it's this haphazard definition, not very thoughtful way of doing it that's causing a problem.
Philanthropy can't know how to step in in this case.
Now you see people like Michael Bloomberg stepping in and giving to the World Health Organization as soon as those cuts were made.
So some of these things are beginning to happen.
But whether somebody like that could sustain all of the federal government's contribution is a question.
The other thing we have to think about is do we want the billionaire setting the agenda?
Some of them are very well-intentioned, but some of them are looking out for their own business interests.
Some of them are just not aware of all the problems on the ground.
That's one of the difficult things about philanthropy is that You don't necessarily see billionaires giving to the local food bank.
They just don't know the scale of the problems.
So those are the organizations that suffer.
You'll see big gifts perhaps to the well-known institutions.
Harvard and MIT will probably continue to get donations.
But will the community groups get it if we leave it to the billionaires?
Probably not.
I mean, I can imagine that on the one hand there are grant recipients not-for-profits, universities that sort of have to reconfigure how they think about what their funding is going to be.
And then I guess on the other side there are sort of foundations and individual donors who maybe are reconfiguring who and where and what they're giving to.
Yeah, there's a great reset that's going on even amid this lack of information.
So you know, I know, especially at research universities for example, all those cuts you've heard about at National Institute of Health, National Science Foundation, those kinds of things those are big drivers of the funding to those kinds of institutions.
That might mean tuition increases.
They might not be able to give as much student aid.
They're going to have to figure out how they make their budgets.
Many of them have come to very immediate halts.
They're all reviewing their spending.
I don't think if you're on a university campus, you can spend a dime now without checking to be sure that it's still okay to do that.
And some foundations have already stepped up and say they're going to distribute more funds.
So the MacArthur Foundation said it would increase the amount it would distribute over the next few years.
Several other foundations are doing it.
Foundations are only required to give 5% of their assets. every year.
And so they'll ratchet it up to sort of six or seven percent.
Some nonprofits are saying, wait a minute, this is a time of crisis.
It needs to be 10 percent, 15 percent.
And there's a precedent for that in that during COVID we saw Really tremendous need and a very swift response from many philanthropies, many big donors to say we get it.
We need to give more right now.
And so there's a giant call from nonprofits to say we really need you to start giving generously right away.
But I can imagine too these donors sort of thinking well, the need has grown for places I've committed to.
I can't necessarily match all of those needs.
Right, right.
And some donors also want to stay out of the political fray as much as possible.
So they're thinking about that calculation, too, and thinking about what's most important to them.
They are also very concerned that they may become targets.
So some of them are giving anonymously.
They're often pooling their funds so that you know it will come from a donor collaborative, a group of people rather than any one individual that then could be targeted.
What have you seen in corporate philanthropy efforts?
Because we've seen a lot of businesses seemingly worried about how they look to the administration and I can imagine that extends to their corporate philanthropy.
I think the biggest cuts that we've seen are in diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
So you know a lot of corporations everyone will remember.
After George Floyd, almost every company in America announced a commitment to say that it was going to do more, both through philanthropy programs and to support Black-owned businesses.
Most of those commitments have been ratcheted back.
Now, you see some examples of of companies that say, uh-uh, we're not gonna do that.
We're gonna keep our programs, we're expanding and we're gonna stay strong.
But for the most part, you see, companies like Walmart have cut back on some of their grants, some of their commitments.
And so I think we're gonna probably see more of that happening quietly.
Corporations care deeply about their relationship with the government.
And so, right now, if they don't think the mood is good for supporting some things that are unpopular with the administration, they're going to cut back.
Stacey's pulse check on the nonprofit world is pretty bracing, especially if there's already a chilling effect on corporate philanthropy and other donors.
So what's Elon Musk's role in all of this?
We'll talk about that after the break.
Stay with us.
Real leaders don't back down when the stakes are high.
They innovate, they push forward, and then they take the stage at the Masters of Scale Summit.
Join us in San Francisco, October 7th to 9th, to hear from the CEO of The New York Times, scientists using cutting-edge technology to find cures, the leader of crypto powerhouse Coinbase, a retired four-star general, and many, many more. more apply now at mastersofscale.com slash apply 25 that's mastersofscale.com slash apply 25
If you're ready to take your startup from idea to impact, then AWS is your launchpad.
From data storage to machine learning to secure app hosting, AWS gives you the tech trusted by the world's fastest scaling startups.
And here's the best part.
Join AWS.
Activate today and you could score up to 100000 in AWS credits, tailored to your stage and network.
Go to awsamazoncom slash, activate and start building.
Expanding your business in the US can feel like a maze.
Every state has its own payroll benefits and compliance rules, which can pull your focus away from growth.
That's why founders use Deal.
Deal is the professional employer organization, or PEO, that gives you a dedicated HR expert plus Fortune 500 level benefits for your team.
The National Association of PEOs says businesses can grow twice as fast if they use one.
So if you're scaling, make it simple with Deal.
Go to deel.com slash MOS and get up to three months free.
Before the break, Chronicle of Philanthropy CEO Stacey Palmer outlined how the nonprofit world is reacting to the Trump administration's cutback on grants and funding.
Now she talks about the role of Elon Musk as a philanthropist and in the government, plus the rise in green hushing what makes her most worried and most optimistic about nonprofits and more.
Let's dive back in.
I have to ask you about Elon Musk and sort of what do folks think of him in the philanthropy world?
I mean, there is a Gates Foundation.
Bloomberg has a foundation.
Musk is not necessarily known for that.
And he's having kind of a different impact.
Yeah.
Well, first of all, let's talk about him as a philanthropist.
But he has also, you know, along with President Trump, said some of the most destructive things about nonprofits themselves.
You know that they are.
You know horrible organizations that are just sleazy and just trying to make money off of things like homelessness.
So there's been a lot of nonprofit bashing. by both Musk and Trump.
And that's incredibly damaging if they don't believe in the value of these organizations.
It's going to cause damage in the short term in terms of resources, but If you were a young person trying to decide where you were going to have a career, if you were motivated to want to be a nonprofit or philanthropy worker, why would you do that after somebody has made it sound like it's the dirtiest profession ever, rather than a call to public service?
But both President Trump and Elon Musk have had issues in philanthropy.
I think we all remember that President Trump was stripped of his ability to run a foundation because he was not doing a good job or an ethical job of that.
We learned about that during the first Trump administration.
Elon Musk has said he's putting money into his foundation, but we can't find evidence of what it's going to and what it's doing.
Very small amounts are, but compared to what...
Other people with resources are giving you know in terms of percentage of assets or disclosing where the money is going.
We are not able to track it.
And I have not seen any evidence that very many of the other reporters who are investigating are deeply trying to figure out where do those dollars go?
Given the extent of wealth that he has, certainly a lot of concern that especially you know the cuts that were being made to international development that you know were really leading to deaths of children.
There are certainly a lot of people saying, Elon Musk, you could, you have the resources to help stave that off.
Do you really want to be starving people around the world?
That's not a good look.
This harks back to what you were saying at the beginning about the philosophical confusion about what the White House and Trump are doing because, on the one hand, Government is inefficient, so we should lay people off.
They're not doing a good enough job.
And on the other hand, the nonprofits are not doing a good job, that that's wasteful also.
And it's like, who is good at what they're doing or-
Who is worthwhile?
I mean, is that what you're talking about when you talk about the confusion?
The confusion is that there's no real philosophy to say you know, we've evaluated this program and it's not working, so we're going to end this one.
But this one's doing great work in education, let's say, and we're going to put more money into that or at least not cut it.
Um, something that is a more systematic evaluation based on evidence and results.
Do the research to say, is this program making a difference?
And is it making a difference in the short term, in the medium term, in the long term?
Is it really changing lives?
Or do we need to change course, do something differently, end it?
How do we think about that?
So if government wanted to invest in that, it could say that program's more effective than something else.
Let's give there.
But that's what we're not seeing.
Yeah, and I guess in the corporate and the nonprofit reactions in their programs on attacks on things like DEI or environmental, how much of that is a shift in semantics versus a shift, Like I've seen the term green hushing rise, sort of the opposite of green washing, sort of hiding sustainability efforts, you know, renaming things that had been DEI to be something else.
What about this is semantics versus mission?
Yeah.
I think that some – I know pretty much every foundation we've talked to said that they're looking at every word on their website and seeing whether there are trigger words.
Just as you see in the federal government, lawyers are reviewing absolutely everything a foundation does to make sure things are okay.
In the absence of really clear guidance from the administration, you can imagine why that's taking a really long time.
But it is not leading anybody to move quickly.
When I was listening to President Trump address Congress and he was sort of name checking through these different programs that he was really kind of making fun of right.
Describing the country of Lesotho as if it were a joke, even though it's home to 2 million people.
But there are plenty of small programs here in the U.S. that find themselves at risk.
I'm just curious how they are responding.
It's the hyperlocal organizations that don't have the resources to really spend time.
They don't have the money to spend on lawyers.
They're responding to immediate needs.
They may not have the best information about all of the kinds of things that are happening.
It does mean sometimes they just pull back entirely and say, we can't do this.
This is going to get us in trouble.
We're going to cut those programs.
And we'll do only the kinds of things that are really safe.
Other organizations will be scrappy and courageous and do things that they believe that they need to do.
They probably will make some language changes.
I think they will try to watch, make sure their staffs are protected.
They might want to take a very low profile approach, let's say, the groups that are working with immigrants who are at risk of being deported.
You're going to be very careful about how you do something like that.
So organizations are responding, but They definitely do not have the resources to do it in a way that's smooth or any of the ways that we would all want that.
Some of them will probably be wiped out by some of this.
Nonprofits did not come into this crisis with a lot of reserves.
COVID really hit most of them very hard.
There was federal government money infused into many organizations.
All of that has dried up.
Inflation has led to amazing increases in all the amounts that we pay, you know, for more goods and services as individuals.
Well, a nonprofit food bank, for example, is paying the same kind of increase in dealing with it.
Nonprofits aren't on the strongest footing even before all of this stuff happened.
And now some of them will not be able to make payroll.
So those are the organizations that I'm worried about.
That could really just disappear in the next few weeks.
In the for-profit world, there's always a lot of attention on new organizations, right?
New startups, certainly right now around AI.
Starting a new nonprofit initiative right now must be like impossible, right?
I mean, it's never easy, but has that just come to a dead stop?
Often what does happen, and it'll be interesting to see what the federal government workers who are laid off do.
They are very public service oriented.
They know some of the kinds of things that are needed to do good.
And they may think that they have great ideas that private philanthropy may want to support.
Let me try the nonprofit route, rather than saying Let me go work for a nonprofit that does similar things.
I'm going to go on my own.
Those organizations don't usually do all that well, and they don't necessarily survive.
But I wouldn't be surprised if we see a wave of that.
And it's possible a few of them will have brilliant ideas that solve problems in new ways.
But right now, I would not advise anybody to start a nonprofit.
Your organization, the Chronicle of Philanthropy, is itself a nonprofit, if I'm remembering that right.
Is that right?
Correct.
How is your organization dealing with these changes?
Do you feel like there are risks to you in all of this?
Yeah.
One of the reasons we became nonprofit is we thought it would enable us to do a whole lot more innovation.
There's been tremendous growth in nonprofit journalism organizations.
And when I told my staff that we were doing this, I said you know, this is where all the cool kids are now.
And you know, this gives us an ability to really think differently about how we do journalism and how close we are to our readership.
Do we worry about the same kinds of things our readers are going through?
Absolutely.
I think we feel more a sense of purpose.
Our newsroom has been reinvigorated by the challenge of...
Covering all these stories.
I think they're all so exhausted, but they definitely need to cover these things.
And I have talked to other nonprofit journalism leaders who are concerned that this administration's hostility to the press could be a problem for tax exempt status organizations that cover the kinds of issues that the administration doesn't like.
We've certainly seen with the Associated Press that the unwillingness to talk about the Gulf of America rather than the Gulf of Mexico has caused them problems.
Well, how long until that trickles into the nonprofit journalism organizations that have tax exempt status?
I don't think any of us are going to stop covering things the way we cover them and that we believe in what we do, but we do know that there are some risks.
Is there any time in history that you're looking to as you cover this shifting dynamic in the white house and beyond, or is this so unprecedented like that?
There's really no place to look?
Yeah, Some of my colleagues have asked me that very question.
Is this precedented?
Because we've been covering this area, you know, since 1988.
And so they figured I would be the person to ask and to know.
And at first I said, oh, absolutely unprecedented.
And then I said wait a minute, I want to check my facts and turn to the experts, who I would turn to as a reporter, and ask them that question.
The Reagan administration is the one that comes closest because there were these very serious cutbacks.
And there was this whole discussion about what is the role of philanthropy and what is the role of nonprofits and how should we do it.
So we have asked experts about what kinds of things they have to say.
I have two conservatives and two liberals who were involved at that moment, who were working in the nonprofit arena, and they all agreed it was unprecedented.
And the reason they said that is this haphazardness.
And what one said.
Who is a very strong conservative said we've just never seen something this nasty before.
The anger, the kind of feeling that none of this aid matters.
It's deeply disturbing to people you know really, of any ideology, because they don't see that there is an ideology.
They want to talk about...
You know, what is the view of government?
There can be robust debates on that, but this seems unprecedented to the people who have watched this over a long period, which is making it hard to have a playbook.
And I think that's why nonprofits and foundations are struggling is what do you do when you can't look to history and you have to figure out all fresh what's happening and how to come together philanthropy and the work of nonprofits?
In a lot of ways, it's inherently optimistic.
Is there anything that's making you optimistic right now?
I think, as long as we continue to have nonprofits that are willing to work collectively to make a difference, that does make me optimistic.
Because sometimes nonprofits just worry about their own communities, their own causes, their own coffers and don't take collective action.
But if they will come together and continue to do that and stay strong, that could make a big difference.
Well, Stacey, this was great.
Thanks for doing it.
Oh, thank you for asking me.
I enjoyed the conversation.
Listening to Stacey, I'm concerned that a layer of our civic society might be being hollowed out.
If the nonprofit world can't make up for lost government grants by leaning on private philanthropy.
If nonprofit workers have become fearful for their physical safety, it just makes you wary.
And with so many historical institutions already under pressure public schools, houses of worship, community organizations this could be another blow to the ties that bind Americans together.
I hope there's a plan in the US administration or at local and state government levels to address that risk.
I used to think employers and companies might fill the gap, but these days I'm less sure.
I know I'm struggling to find my own optimism and I just hope that Stacy's right that those who are mission-driven to care for others keep the flame burning.
I'm Bob Safian.
Thanks for listening.
Meet Nicole Nicholas Capital One, business customer and co-owner of Anset Uncles, a plant-based restaurant and community space in Brooklyn, New York.
That got its start from a need for unity.
The inspiration.
It was born from the desire to create a space that felt like home, where we can connect community culture, good food and come together with family and friends.
That's how we birthed Anset Uncles.
Nicole and her husband Mike were fulfilling their dream of bringing people together out of their home kitchen, but they soon learned that the demand for community was greater than they knew.
It became overwhelming, and we were like, we need home, but not in our actual home.
We realized that there was also a need in our community for something bigger in our neighborhood.
So we had to find a place.
Moving from a home operation into a storefront was a huge next step, but Nicole and Mike were able to take it on with the help of Capital One Business, not for the week as a small business.
Finding resources is super important because that's the way you'll be able to manage and scale.
We would have never done that without having Capital One to be able to help us along the way.
The cashback rewards are very helpful.
You know, it just gave us that runway to be able to breathe a little bit.
Then you get to focus on the cooking of the food and making the experience great.
To learn more, go to CapitalOne.com slash business cards.
If you're in private capital, you understand that your next great deal starts with who you know.
That's why over 3000 firms trust Affinity, the CRM platform purpose-built for private capital.
Affinity's relationship intelligence reveals your team's strongest paths to founders, investors and decision makers, using insights hidden in emails, calendars and meetings.
With powerful AI tools like Affinity Notetaker and Deal Assist, you'll spend less time managing data and more time closing the right deals.
Learn more at affinity.co slash marketplace.
AI agents can make your teams more productive, but if they aren't connected to other agents or your data or your existing workflows, they can only take you so far.
Any business can add AI agents, but IBM connects your agents across your company to change how you do business.
Let's create smarter business.
IBM.
Rapid Response is a Wait What original.
I'm Bob Safian.
Our executive producer is Eve Troh.
Our producer is Alex Morris.
Associate producer is Mashimaku Tonina.
Mixing and mastering by Aaron Bastinelli.
Our theme music is by Ryan Holiday.
Our head of podcasts is Lital Malad.
For more, visit rapidresponseshow.com.
