Capstone_ Marci E. Gaines_July 2016

Best Practices in Youth Philanthropy
The Impact of Philanthropy and Development in Youth and the Nonprofit Sector
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Arts in Philanthropy and Development
Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota
Winona, Minnesota
by
Marci E. Gaines
July 2016

2

Master of Arts in Philanthropy and Development
As administration and faculty of Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota, I have evaluated the
Final Capstone Paper:
Best Practices in Youth Philanthropy
by
Marci E. Gaines
and recommend that the degree of Master of Arts be conferred upon the candidate.
Jim Ollhoff, Ph.D. Date
Program Director

3

Abstract
Interest in youth volunteering from researchers, policymakers and practitioners has never
been higher. Young people require a deeper understanding of philanthropy and pathways to
action. Furthermore, systematic and intentional efforts have been made to expose students to
service learning, philanthropy education, and broader participation programs. Additionally,
requirements have been instituted in some high schools, colleges, and universities, of the form of
full courses or extracurricular activities that include philanthropy education. This hybrid
capstone utilizes a traditional literature review and an independent case study of youth
philanthropy initiatives at Pennsylvania State University, both of which explore the importance
of K-12 youth philanthropy initiatives, their impact on children and youth, and ways schools and
organizations can engage youth in philanthropy programs.
Keywords: Service-learning; philanthropy; youth development; civic engagement; education

4

Acknowledgments
There are many people I need to thank for helping me finish the capstone journey. First
and foremost I wish to thank all my capstone committee members for their time, effort, energy,
patience and their willingness to assist me in this endeavor. I am sincerely grateful to Josephine
Everly, our capstone mentor for your guidance, prompt responses, and for providing insight
throughout the process. Josephine has been a mentor and role model to me for the past two years
and her friendship means more to me than she will ever know. I want to thank Dr. Jim Ollhoff
for taking the time to read my capstone. I would like to thank all of the staff and faculty at Saint
Mary’s University of Minnesota that I had the privilege of learning from in this outstanding
program. Some of my most memorable include Simone Joyaux, ACFRE, Adv Dip and Audrey
Kintzi. A special thanks to Jami Spitzer for her invaluable assistance with ensuring that all
students in the Philanthropy and Development program had the best experience possible.
Completion of the graduate program also required the assistance of my classmates and
school colleagues. My graduate cohort was comprised of an extraordinary group of people who
quickly bonded together to support and encourage all to complete the program. Cohort members
who became great friends and made the capstone journey fun included Devonte’ Bryant,
Anthony Leigh, Tom Houser, Christina Hemens, and Heather Schallock. Many additional thanks
must be given to family, coworkers and friends for the constant encouragement and guidance
throughout this process. To all of the aforementioned individuals, I say one final Thank You.

5

Table of Contents
Title Page………………………………………..…………………………….………………….1
Final Paper Approval Form………………………...…………………….………………………2
Abstract………………………………………..………………………………………………….3
Acknowledgments………………………………………..…………………………….………....4
Table of Contents………………………………………..…………………………….………….5
Chapter One: Introduction………………………………………..……………………………….6
Importance………………………………………..………………………………….…....6
Background………………………………………..……………………………………....6
Scope and Limitations………………………………………..……………………….…..7
Definition of Terms.………………………………………..…………………………..…9
Chapter Two: Literature Review………………………….…………………………..................10
Importance of Youth Philanthropy Initiatives …………………………………………..11
Barriers to Youth Philanthropy…………………………………..…...………………….12
Impact of Youth Philanthropy Initiatives. ………………………………………………14
Implementation of Youth Philanthropy Initiatives………………………………............17
Chapter Three: Methodology……………………………………………………………...…..…25
Case Study: Pennsylvania State University Student Philanthropy Programs….…….....25
Senior Class Gift Program..………………………………………………………...27
Student Philanthropy Council..……………………………………………………..27
Four Diamonds Fund, Dance-a-Thon..………………………………………….....28
Chapter Four: Application……………………………………………………………………….31
Chapter Five: Recommendations………..……………………………….....................................35
Lessons Learned.................................................................................................................35
Recommendations..............................................................................................................36
Further Research................................................................................................................40
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................41
References………………………...……………………………………….…………………......42
Appendix………………………...……………………………………….……………................49

6

Chapter One: Introduction
Where will the next generation of philanthropists come from? What ways can we ensure a
culture of philanthropy is instilled in our society that will remain strong and continue to grow?
Many would concur the answer is to center around our nation’s youth. With limited research to
date on youth philanthropy, youth and adult funders are interested in exploring the broader youth
philanthropy context.
Importance
Research has shifted towards creating positive youth development models that encourage
children and youth to understand the importance of giving and serving. In addition, businesses
are now encouraging volunteerism and service learning, resulting in business leaders creating
corporate foundations.
The nonprofit sector has begun to focus on training the next generation of philanthropists.
Community foundations, youth organizations, and nonprofit groups have explored best practices
in youth philanthropy. Youth-adult partnerships, involving youth on boards, and youth grant
making are opportunities that allow young people to be leaders in the sector.
Background
Youth philanthropy is a recent trend in the United States, growing out of the late 1980s
and early 1990s. Over this time, the local, public schools, the research community, and business
sectors of American society have been engaged in promoting an understanding of the many
forms of philanthropy.
At the local level, service learning has gained popularity in public schools. At the
national level, legislation and federal funding have developed youth service programs. By 1993,
President Bill Clinton signed the National and Community Service Trust Act. This trust act

7

would advance youth service initiatives by administering programs, like AmeriCorps and Learn
and Serve America. These programs engage individuals in intensive service each year at
nonprofits, schools, public agencies, and community and faith-based groups across the country
where they learn valuable work skills and an appreciation of citizenship.
This long history of youth service, education, and many other forms of youth
philanthropy provides young philanthropists with effective practices to share and engage in
meaningful work. More and more organizations are introducing and involving youth in
philanthropy, yet these organizations seem unaware of efforts being done in this area.
Coordination of resources available for youth, adults, and trained educators would be greatly
beneficial.
Scope and Limitations
There is great potential for collaboration in working towards a community model that
would teach philanthropy and expand opportunities for our next generation. This hybrid capstone
will explore the best existing practices on how children and youth can be engaged in
philanthropy; today’s youth are tomorrow’s philanthropists. Our community needs future donors,
volunteers, and fundraisers. Helping youth understand community needs and how they can make
a difference increases the probability they will become donors and volunteers.
The goals of this research are to 1) provide an overview of K–12 youth philanthropy
initiatives and why they are important; 2) identify successful program designs that implement
youth philanthropy opportunities and highlight their impact on children and youth; and 3)
provide a continuum of best practices for sustainability of youth philanthropy opportunities that
displays how schools and organizations can engage youth in philanthropy programs in the United
States. These recommendations aim to guide organizations that are interested in adopting youth

8

leadership components into their programs, to make youth aware of opportunities, and to help
identify gaps in youth programs. In order to achieve this overall objective, the following research
questions framed this capstone:
1. What is the story of youth philanthropy?
2. What are the needs of youth philanthropy?
3. What recommendations might address those needs?
The information in this capstone was gathered from many different sources, including
interviews with practitioners throughout the nonprofit sector with experience in youth
philanthropy, community engagement, and fundraising. These interviews were conducted face-
to-face and via phone conferencing and then transcribed. Additionally, a review of the wide body
of research literature and online resources were addressed regarding youth development and
civic engagement nationwide.

9

Definition of Terms
Common concepts and definitions within K–12 youth-philanthropy includes:
• Youth Philanthropy, which according to Nissan (2007, p. 13) “is the engagement of
young people in voluntary giving, service, and association that serves an intended public
good.”
• Philanthropy Education, which as described by Learning to Give (2014, p. 13) “teaches
youth about the nonprofit sector and the importance of giving time, talent, and treasure
for the common good.”
• Youth Development/Empowerment, described as “the ongoing growth process in
which all youth are engaged in attempting to (a) meet their basic personal and social
needs to be safe, feel cared for, be valued, be useful, and be spiritually grounded; and (b)
to build skills and competencies that allow them to function and contribute in their daily
lives” (Pittman, 2003, p.8).
• Civic Engagement, which has been defined as “individual and collective actions
designed to identify and address issues of public concern” (American Psychological
Association, n.d.).
• Civic Education, which has been described as, “the cultivation of the virtues,
knowledge, and skills necessary for political participation” (Gutmann, 1987, p. 287).

10

Chapter Two: Literature Review
Because of rapid growth in the field of youth civic engagement over the last twenty years,
there was a very opportune time to reflect on the state of the field, particularly regarding the
research on outcomes of various educational strategies. Hollander (2008) also thought it would
be helpful to gather both researchers and sophisticated practitioners, who want to demonstrate
outcomes, to gain their perspective on what research is most needed and understand if this
information could help move the field.
As the interest of youth volunteering rises, as well as the reasons why individuals give to
a particular cause, what are ways that we can increase and maintain civic engagement? This
literature review will highlight methods in which organizations can engage youth, explore
existing youth in philanthropy strategies, as well as investigate the impacts of involvement and
giving based upon culture and social factors. Finally, this research will reflect educational
approaches applied to inspire more youth to be engaged in philanthropy.
Interests in youth volunteering from researchers, policymakers and practitioners have
never been higher. This has, in part, been driven by a belief that youth volunteering can help
promote a range of benefits in young people yet there remains a dearth of quantitative evidence
to support these assumptions (Hill & Stevens, 2010).
Substantial research in the social sciences has approached charitable giving from a
variety of perspectives, e.g., economic psychological, sociological, and anthropological. We rely
on a social psychological perspective to explain the motivations of individuals to make charitable
gifts (Dashefsky & Lazerwitz, 2011).

11

Youth philanthropy means different things to different people----from personal giving
and volunteering to organized grantmaking---and all approaches demonstrating, a generous
impulse by young people to help their neighbors (Garza & Stevens, 2002).
There are many programs and resources for youth philanthropy worldwide. According to
research conducted by Bokoff and Dillon (2014) for the Foundation Center, there are 110 youth
philanthropy programs at nonprofit organizations, some 200 foundations with a youth
philanthropy board or committee, 55 university-based programs, and ten conferences, with a
specific youth grant making component that has more than 140 open and accessible content
pieces including reports, white papers, blogs, videos, podcasts, recorded webinars, worksheets,
guides, articles, and curricula.
Importance of Youth Philanthropy Initiatives
Youth flourish from being active in philanthropic initiatives (Rosen & Sedonaen, 2001).
When young people are not involved in the community they often feel marginalized and
unimportant (Crestinger, 1999). Research shows that young people who volunteer, write grants,
or fundraise, learn life skills, responsibility, and commitment as well while they improve their
grades and behavior in school (Safrit 2002; Rosen and Sedonaen 2001).
While there is no one-size-fits-all model for youth philanthropy, different youth program
models exist within groups that are racially, geographically, economically, and culturally
diverse. These groups share an understanding that philanthropy plays a vital role in American
society. Examples of these programs include Jumpstart on Youth in Maine and The Tarsadia
Foundation in California. The Maine Community Foundation enables youth to make grants
through school-based jobs, while The Tarsadia Foundation gives elementary school through
college-aged youth the opportunity to serve on a junior board with responsibility for allocating a

12

percentage of the foundation’s grants budget. Junior board members review applications,
conduct site visits, and make grants. The foundation also organizes monthly service projects and
youth leadership development opportunities (Bokoff & Dillon, 2014).
By forming youth in philanthropy programs, participants increase hands-on involvement,
which is exciting for youth as they learn about the impact philanthropy has on their community.
More people, now and in the future, will be involved in helping solve community problems. All
individuals affiliated with the programs will be strategically involved in the community, building
links to donors, funders, and leaders (Association of Fundraising Professionals, 2009). By
supporting and engaging young leaders, adults, organizations and communities experience direct
benefits, through stronger connections to other young people in the community. (Zeldin,
McDaniel, Topitzes, & Lorens, 2001)
Barriers to Youth Philanthropy
There are many significant challenges to successfully implementing youth leadership
activities. These challenges require thought and planning to overcome the obstacles that
organizations may face in their pursuit of helping youth reach high levels of responsibility and
leadership.
These barriers impede progress toward full youth development and sustainable philanthropy
programs. Paul & Lefkovitz (2006, p. 10) offer several categories of barriers, including but not
limited to
• Socioeconomic demographics: The current economic and social conditions,
specifically low-income or impoverished communities that have lower high school
graduation rates. With limited resources in this area, can often constrain young
people’s ability to be active in their community or aware of the opportunity to do so.

13

• Social Conditions: The discrimination against young people and more specifically,
young women; lack of self-empowerment-generating opportunities.
• Adult and youth perceptions: Adult’s perceptions of youth can interfere with an
organization’s attempts to implement meaningful youth leadership activities. Youth
can often time feel stereotyped by adults and/or intimidated. Overcoming these
perceptions by both youth and adults is critical to supporting youth-adult partnerships
and the longevity of youth programs.
• Transportation and transiency: Many youth participants move frequently and/or
have difficulty with transportation due to economic and family circumstances,
making it difficult to maintain stay connected.
• Making leadership appealing to youth: It is important that youth and adults
understand the many roles an individual can hold within the philanthropic sector aside
from traditional roles, such an officer in an organization.
• The mismatch between youth skills and adult expectations: Adults may have too
little or high of expectations for youth when they haven’t yet developed the necessary
skills to be successful.
• Adults’ unwillingness to undertake major change: A great deal of work must be
done to encourage adults to change their perceptions of youth and undertake the
responsibility to empower youth to be engaged and to bring awareness to the
community about the positive changes youth are capable of making.
• Geography/cultural norms: In a multicultural and multi-generational society, it is
vital to have collaboration within the community and broaden young people’s
awareness of social injustices to stimulate involvement and a desire for change. By

14

having youth recognize the history and ongoing impact of inequalities within a
community, it can help young people focus their change making initiatives.
Understanding the barriers to youth philanthropy is foundational to creating youth programs
and increase civic engagement. These programs help youth to understand the importance of
giving to others and serving the community.
Impact of Youth Philanthropy Initiatives
Youth philanthropy is becoming a strong area of focus throughout organizations.
Involvement provides youth different levels of personal development opportunities often not
experienced in other school and community activities. These programs allow young people to
build connections to the local community, strengthen core values of generosity, develop personal
and communication skills, provide an outlet for passions and areas of social interests, and create
an environment that requires working on a team to address community challenges (Koch, 2013).
Age, family income, education, denomination preference, and cultural backgrounds
contribute to the involvement and interest levels for individuals, especially regarding youth. A
variety of theoretical approaches, drawn from differing disciplines, undergird research on charity
(Dashefsky & Lazerwitz, 2011):
1. Individuals contribute because it satisfies a consumer spending need (economics).
2. Individuals give because they find themselves in an immediate situation where they
are constrained to do so (psychology).
3. Individuals donate charity out of a rational self-interest (sociology and anthropology).
A fourth possibility is derived from social psychology. Individuals give charity when they
participate in a culture and network of social relations that stress mutual interdependence and

15

mutual responsibility especially when that culture has socialized them to do so and they identify
with it.
The kind of life that people in different parts of the world lead is heavily dependent upon the
economic and social development of their country. This is significantly impacted by the quality
and accessibility of formal education. Such factors as culture and socialization can motivate the
involvement and interest levels for individuals, particularly in regards to youth (Musau, 2014).
In order to support and foster development and civic engagement, case studies have been
conducted on Harambee schools in Kenya and traditions of Amish barn raising.
Harambee is a Kenyan tradition that emphases the importance of philanthropy through
fundraising and community development activities. These activities aim to promote the social
and economic needs of the community. The Harambee tradition stresses the importance of
working together for the common good to ensure the quality of life of Kenyans is better.
An organized study was conducted in 2013 by Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota
(Musau, 2014) that explored the impact of the Harambee tradition of philanthropy on the
philanthropic activities of Kenyan immigrants in the Twin Cities. The face-to-face interviews of
12 Kenyan immigrants yielded six themes which illustrate that Harambee (a) skews towards
social needs limited to Kenyans and other similar groups, (b) conforms to familiarity and
comfort, (c) espouse shared responsibility, (d) enhances community participation and
mobilization, (e) maintains continuity of philanthropy, and (f) harmonizes altruistic behavior and
satisfaction. Two sub-themes that emerged showed that Harambee is for the common good and
that it is not easy to replicate in other settings. The findings show that first-generation Kenyan
immigrants continue to practice Harambee years after immigration. It is recommended that a
Kenyan cultural center is established in the Twin Cities to preserve the Kenyan history and

16

culture as well as to provide avenues for research on Kenyan immigrant issues and those of
similar groups in the United States.
Another real life example of a culture aiding others in their community is the Amish’s
practice of barn raising. Barn raising is an example of a frolic, a work event that combines
socializing with a practical goal (Amish America, 2010). The barn raising fulfills a practical
need and also serves to tie the Amish community together, reinforcing Amish society through a
very visible expression of the principle of mutual aid.
Besides barn raising, there are numerous other types of work frolics that Amish typically
participate in. For example, quilting bees gather women together to do the painstaking work of
stitching a quilt, while offering a time for fellowship and sharing news at the same time.
Canning, shucking corn and shelling peas are other, smaller-scale occasions where Amish take
pleasure from participating in joint cooperative work projects—both from the social aspect as
well as from the deeper sense of satisfaction in seeing tangible results of one’s labor (Amish
America, 2010).
Creating a philosophy of “We are all in this together” establishes the center blocks of
building a stronger, more committed cluster of individuals who are willing to serve others and
make a positive difference in their community. The examples stated highlight ways that Kenyan
and Amish communities intertwine teaching philanthropy and community service as a way of
life.
Thus, by instilling an understanding of how one can serve and the impact that service can
have on the community, youth are empowered to become the next group of philanthropists.
This, in turn, provides young people the opportunity for a life dedicated to serving others.
Philanthropy is empathy in action.

17

Implementation of Youth Philanthropy Initiatives
Studies suggest that caring and sharing can be taught at all ages (Bentley & Nissan,
1996). This learning begins very early. Infants can exhibit empathetic behavior within the first
few years of life (Eisenberg, 1992). Children learn empathy by being cared for and taking care of
others. As youth get older, they can begin to struggle with these complex philanthropic issues.
According to a study by the Indiana Center on Philanthropy (2014), middle school (grades four
through eight) is the opportune time to introduce philanthropy to youth through service learning
and reflective learning. During these years, students have the cognitive ability necessary to grasp
such topics. Moreover, students are most at risk from successfully transitioning into adulthood. A
study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) analyzed census data from
2008 and found that household income dramatically impacts a youth's outcomes. Youth in low-
income families are more likely to be teen mothers, engage in gang activity, engage in delinquent
behaviors, and are less likely to graduate from a four-year college than are youth from middle-
and high-income families (Smith, 2016). Engagement in service learning and/or reflective
learning can mitigate some of these at-risk behaviors are imperative to develop active, engaged
citizens who are able to participate in and contribute fully to a democratic society (Berg &
Blank, 2006).
In 1996, a study by Bentley and Nissan (1996), presented, for the first time, a complete
review of existing research on how school-age children learn philanthropy. The study identified
factors that lead to altruistic behavior. A child’s effective learning occurs when someone of
significance in their lives models this voluntary behavior with the intention to help others. Not
only is learning strengthened, but also the child is able to understand the cause and effects
philanthropy has on community when the model adult is knowledgeable about philanthropy and

18

is able to describe these benefits to the child. Lastly, learning is significantly enhanced for a
child when given the opportunity to engage in giving and serving activities.
In an ideal world, philanthropy would be learned by all young people at an early age from
observing and talking to parents and other adults who model philanthropic behavior (Bjorhovde,
2002). Others (Bremmers, 1996; Grusec & Kucynski, 1997; Morseberger, 1997) agree,
emphasizing the importance of parents and other adult influencers demonstrating and talking
about values and community and, by extension philanthropy. Other factors can also contribute to
the development of philanthropic behavior. These include a caring neighborhood, participation in
religious life, an adult mentor, youth group activity, schools that promote helping others, and
opportunities for community service (Nelson, 1998).
A survey by Cone & Roper (2000) found that ninety-two percent of Americans believe
that encouraging children to participate in charities allows them to become better citizens,
ninety-six percent of Americans believe parents’ charitable giving and volunteering is a good
way to teach children about helping others, and ninety-four percent believe parents play a key
role in getting kids involved. However, more than two-thirds of parents say their children are not
involved in charitable activities.
Despite these statistics, home is the best place to teach values of empathy and caring.
Understanding the value of giving back is a fundamental aspect of a child’s development. Debra
Mesch, director of Women’s Philanthropy Institute (2013), says talking to children about giving
increased the likelihood that children would give by twenty percent. That held true across race,
gender, age and more.
A study in 2009 by Fidelity Charitable, reported ninety-two percent of males named their
female spouses as the main person who influenced them in charitable giving. With that being

19

said, the first step in teaching children philanthropy at home is for parents to be in agreement in
terms of philanthropic values and goals before engaging children in the process.
Talking to children about giving allows parents to share charitable passions and allows
the child to understand the value of giving back to the community. Involving children in
decision-making encourages more passionate, enthusiastic giving. This opportunity allows
children to integrate those causes into the family’s philanthropy and personal passions.
However, today’s child has a high probability to grow up under the loose guidance of an
overworked, financially challenged single parent (Bentley, 2009). The limitations of a child’s
family and school environment can be especially difficult for today’s youth.
In such cases, should the value of philanthropy be taught formally outside the home? If
so, whose responsibility is it? And exactly what should be taught (Bjorhovde, 2002)?
Spencer Foundation explained, “We know that roughly one-third of youth will drop out
of high school and only about one-half will attend college in their early adulthood (Hollander &
Burack, 2008). By sharing the body of knowledge and encouraging civic engagement at an early
age, we are lessening the chance of youth at risk by promoting self-advocacy and broadening the
possibilities for positive social change. By doing so, youth have the opportunity to become
leaders in philanthropy among their peers. These young leaders demonstrate higher career
aspirations, increased self-esteem, and improved high school completion rates (Bloomberg,
Ganey, Alba, Quintero, & Alcantara, 2003).
Philanthropy education initiatives were previously designed for and offered to students
within postsecondary institutions. However, over time, modifications have been made to include
K–12 students, and are predicated on the following types of philanthropy education:

20

• Character Building, which has been explained by Falk and Nissan (2007) in terms of
prosocial behavior, “The character education and character building programs for schools
and youth organizations often involved service to the community, encouraged individual
kindness toward and caring for fellow members, and taught personal responsibility” (p.
19).
• Community Service, which has been defined by Learning to Give (2014), as
“volunteering to improve upon aspects of a community.”
• Service Learning that has been defined as a “teaching and learning strategy that
integrates meaningful community service with instruction and reflection to enrich the
learning experience, teach civic responsibility, and strengthen communities,” (The
National Service-Learning Clearinghouse, 2005). A frequent assumption within the field
of philanthropy is that service learning exclusively references scholarly contexts and that
activities are based in academic coursework (Keen & Hall, 2009).
• Student Philanthropy, which according to Olberding (2009), is “an experiential learning
approach that provides students with the opportunity to study social problems and
nonprofit organizations, and then make decisions about investing funds in them” (p.463).
• Youth Grant Making, although a relatively new approach to youth philanthropy, has
been described as an activity that empowers students to both learn and practice the
process of charitable giving through financial grants. (Lily School of Philanthropy, 2014)
• Youth Fundraising, which is described by Learning to Give (2014) as engaging youth in
“soliciting money to benefit a cause or organization”

21

Though philanthropy in a broad sense seems to have a long history, it was not officially
integrated into the K–12 education system until the late 1950s when community service and
character building were taught in school (Falk & Nissan, 2007).
In 1989, President George H.W. Bush established the Office of National Service in the White
House and signed the National and Community Service Act in 1990. This law authorized grants
to support service-learning programs in schools and other national service programs for youth
corps, nonprofits, and colleges and universities across the country.
The Corporation for National and Community Service has provided opportunities for service
to young people across the country. Two of its programs---AmeriCorps and Learn and Service---
offer unique opportunities that empower young people to help meet critical needs of the
communities through service, citizenships, and responsibility. AmeriCorps has engaged over
400,000 young people in service through programs across the country since 1994. Learn and
Serve is a service learning program that awards grants to K–12 schools, conducts research
regarding the effectiveness of service learning, and supplementary, provides training and
program materials.
Additionally, Maryland became the first state to require service-learning components in
schools, which included “preparation, action, and reflection components” (Maryland State
Department of Education, 2003). These requirements were established for elementary, middle,
and high schools throughout Maryland. High school students were required to perform seventy-
five hours of community service to be eligible for graduation. Since then, a number of states
have followed by encouraging service in schools. As of 2011, nineteen states awarded course
credit for volunteering and service learning, an increase from seven states in 2001 (Sparks,
2013).

22

The Indiana University Center on Philanthropy identified school (grades four through eight)
as a time to introduce service learning and reflective philanthropic exercises, given children’s
cognitive and social skills at that age (Bentley & Nissan, 1996). However, this does not exclude
older children, who have the necessary cognitive-moral skill to grasp more complex topics but
who are more at risk of poverty, juvenile delinquency, and dropping out of high school. This is
why promoting reflective caring for others is a pressing issue for youth to clearly communicate
and exemplify helping, sharing, and altruistic behavior. This practice can begin as early as in
preschool years.
The number of philanthropy curricula is limited, and many organizations do not provide a
comprehensive curriculum that teaches philanthropy. That being said, a few programs merit
recognition. This include:
• The Council of Michigan Foundation’s program, Learning to Give: The K-12 Education
in Philanthropy Project
• The Girl Scout’s Strength in Sharing Program
• The Community Partnerships with Youth’s initiative
• Youth as Philanthropists: Developing Habits of Giving and Sharing
• The AFP’s New Jersey chapter’s Youth in Philanthropy, 2001
Subsequently, organizations such as Learning to Give equips K–12 teachers to educate
students as philanthropists with knowledge, skills, and action to make a better world by
connecting student’s civic lives to academic learning.
Learning to Give lessons and concepts infuse real-world civic purpose into the content
educators are already teaching. Rather than adding to their teaching load, the lessons compliment
student-centered approaches to teaching and learning with understanding about how philanthropy

23

contributes to the common good. Students learn concepts from giving compliments to defining
the role of nonprofit organizations. They develop their unique civic passions as they acquire
knowledge of different issues and practice a variety of ways to take action.
Learning to Give lessons develops the whole child by connecting academics with
responsible citizenship. Learning to Give has been shown to promote caring attitudes and
compassion in the school and community as youth gain autonomy and purpose for their
learning. All lessons are aligned with Common Core State Standards, individual state standards,
and some international standards (Learning to Give, 2014).
By sharing the body of knowledge and encouraging civic engagement at an early age,
adults are lessening the chance of youth at risk by promoting self-advocacy and broadening the
possibilities for positive social change (Hollander & Burack, 2008). Moreover, research suggests
young people engaged in faith-based service learning opportunities have stronger ties to their
congregations, resulting in an increase in participation that nurtures development and healthy
lifestyles (Benson & Roehlkepartian, 1993). These programs help fill the gap that home and
school cannot always meet by offering a safe harbor from negative influences in the community.
Faith-based youth programs allow young people to participate in service learning programs,
religious programs, such as youth group, and social activities that encourage interpersonal
communication skills and talents to be developed and shared.
Youth philanthropy opportunities have been on the rise since the 1980s. According to the
Corporation for National Community Service, from just less than 1 million in 1984, 6.1 million
students volunteered in 1997, and approximately 10.6 million in 2004 (2006). With the rise of
youth service in the United States, organizations have made understanding youth service and
philanthropy a priority. Among these organizations are Independent Sector (1991), Youth

24

Service America (1986), and Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University (1987). Additionally,
long-established institutions have focused on youth philanthropy such as the Council of
Michigan Foundations, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, and the Association of Fundraising
Professionals.
These programs offer a unique experience for youth and adults to foster relationships that
promote sharing information, resources, and experience. Adults provide valuable information
and create opportunities for youth to be actively engaged as leaders in the community. Youth
philanthropy programs are often strengthened when they establish working with other
community organizations. Companies, such as State Farm Insurance Company and Prudential
Financial, have encouraged these successful partnerships since the early 1990s by recognizing
young people and adults for working with youth.
With over 68,000 private foundations in the United States, only a handful dedicates their
missions to youth service and involving young people in philanthropy. Two foundations
specifically focus on the betterment of youth initiatives in their states. These include El Pomar
Foundation in Colorado and PGE Foundation in Oregon (AFP, 2007). Both programs involve
youth in fundraising and grant making initiatives to improve the quality of life in their
communities.
As a result, much progress has been made in the last few decades to ensure youth have
the opportunity to gain new skills that they will need to be future donors, volunteers, board
members, teachers, and leaders in the community. This literature describes the scope of available
resources related to youth philanthropy. The goal of this capstone is to determine where
improvements in the field can be applied and give recommendations to enhance the opportunities
provided to youth to become more developed philanthropists in society.

25

Chapter Three: Case Study: Pennsylvania State University
Student Philanthropy Programs
Student philanthropy, a teaching strategy used in colleges and universities that utilize
time and talents of students, has steadily increased over the last ten years. Olberding (2009)
examined the long-term effects of student philanthropy to show that student philanthropy has a
positive impact on student’s awareness, learning, beliefs, and intentions.
Student philanthropy has been defined as “an experimental learning approach that
provides students with the opportunity to study social problems and nonprofit organizations, and
then make decisions about investing funds in them (Olberding, 2009, p. 463)
Several student philanthropy initiatives associated with the annual giving programs from
Pennsylvania State University were selected for a further in-depth exploration to showcase next
steps in the youth philanthropy initiatives.
Purpose
The purpose of the case study is to examine the perceptions of practitioners at
Pennsylvania State University with experience in youth philanthropy, community engagement,
and fundraising to examine the long-term effects of student philanthropy programs.
Design
Interviews were conducted with chosen practitioners with experience in youth
philanthropy, community engagement, and fundraising. Professionals interviewed included
• Geoff Hallett: Director of Student and Recent Graduate Giving Programs,
Pennsylvania State University

26

• Suzanne Graney: Director of Four Diamonds Fund, Pennsylvania State University
• LaToria Thomas: Donor Services Officer, Baton Rouge Area Foundation
• Patricia Bjorhovde: Nonprofit Consultant
The interview emphasized the concept of how student philanthropy programs are a
continuum of the youth philanthropy movement. Interviews were conducted during the summer
and fall of 2015 via phone conferencing and then transcribed.
Findings
The class gift campaign and student philanthropy council are two student-led
organizations that seek to promote giving back to the piece of Penn State that is most meaningful
to that particular person. The class gift campaign raises approximately $250,000 each year from
members of the senior class through the student philanthropy council, which highlights the
countless philanthropic causes championed by Penn State students. Furthermore, the Four
Diamonds Fund Dance-a-Thon is a yearlong fundraising and awareness campaign for childhood
cancer.
As the Director of Student and Recent Graduate Giving Programs: Annual Giving, Geoff
Hallett plays a vital role in overseeing these student and recent graduate fundraising efforts for
one of the largest universities in the world. Penn State’s students, alumni, and friends have a
thriving philanthropic spirit. Hallett manages several programs that direct and focus those
passions to benefit current and future students. These programs play a fundamental part in
creating a distinctive on-campus culture of giving back in which individuals can give to anything
that has been important to their Penn State experience: their college, a student organization, a
sport, or scholarships. Susan Graney is the primary relationship manager with Penn State

27

University's largest annual donor - the Penn State Dance Marathon (THON) - and oversees the
strategic growth of the Four Diamonds Mini-THON program. As the Director of the Four
Diamonds Fund, she works with over 45,000 students to help Four Diamonds raise more than
$17 million annually to advance the mission of conquering childhood cancer.
Through the following sections, significant findings from these interviews will be
revealed to highlight how these programs are facilitating youth development, civic engagement,
and helping students understand the complexity of organizational change.
Senior Class Gift Program
The senior class gift program consists of peer-to-peer fundraising and other formal
solicitation strategies that assist youth in understanding how they can make the world a better
place. Seniors meet annually and decide on a gift to be given on behalf of the senior class.
Geoff Hallett said, “To be successful, the program must create a philanthropic culture
that is more than “time/talent” and less transactional in the giving mindset. We as staff must
identify how we can add to a student’s experience. Through offering opportunities to ensure
student success such as interview prep and undergrad research, we create opportunities for
students that will optimistically generate the desire for students to continuously give their time,
talent and treasures to their university.”
Student Philanthropy Council
The Student Philanthropy Council's mission is to foster a lasting awareness and
appreciation for philanthropy at Penn State through donor interaction, student involvement, and
alumni outreach (The Pennsylvania State University, 2016).

28

The council plays a vital role in identifying campus organizations that are philanthropic
in nature and how they can perform more philanthropic acts of service throughout the Penn State
communities. Consisting of twenty-five student ambassadors, these students work collectively to
engage over 40,000 students across three campuses at Penn State in philanthropic programs. The
students use a variety of outreach tools such as mass emails to students, marketing via social
media, and building relationships with student organizations or other social programs in the
community, specifically on campus.
Members help organize events, campaigns, and other efforts throughout the year that help
to celebrate philanthropy at Penn State. Through participating in university development
operations, members build skills to become better communicators, fundraisers, and leaders.
These experiences begin to shape their attitudes and vision of philanthropy and help equip
students to become future donors and potential development professionals.
Four Diamonds Fund, Dance-a-Thon
Each year, Four Diamonds provides direct support to approximately 600 children with
cancer – 100 who are newly diagnosed and 500 who are continuing their fight. Since its creation
in 1972, Four Diamonds has helped more than 3,600 children and families and supported a
diverse platform of childhood cancer research at Penn State Children's Hospital, seeking
improved treatments and cures to benefit those around the world. (Four Diamonds Fund, 2016)
The 2016 Pennsylvania State University IFC/PanHellenic Dance Marathon (THON) is
the largest student- run philanthropy in the world and continues to be the longest dance marathon
in the country, lasting over 46 hours. This effort engages more than 15,000 students across Penn
State, including the University Park campus in addition to twenty-three campuses across

29

Pennsylvania all in the hopes to conquer pediatric cancer. Moreover, over 30,000 elementary,
middle school, and high school students have joined the effort by starting dance marathons of
their own.
Suzanne Graney stated, “The enthusiasm and dedication of tens of thousands of
empowered young volunteers, compassionate caring donors, and inspiring children who are at
the heart of everything we do makes my job so rewarding. I am inspired on a regular basis and
know that the work we do is truly making a difference”
To be selected to participate in the student leadership for THON, students must apply
through a vigorous application process. The application consists of students distinguishing
themselves through accomplishments, grade point average, and skills they can contribute. Upon
conclusion of the selection process, 17 student leaders are selected to oversee 350 students and
3,000 committee members.
As a student-led philanthropy initiative, students are the “army” of the dance-a-thon.
Student leaders are required to work with the University on important decisions to be made
throughout the year and manage all aspects of the dance marathon, including communications
via social media, outreach projects, the website, and a newsletter. In 2016, THON raised over
$9.7 million in support of Four Diamonds and over $136 million over the last forty-four years
(The Pennsylvania State University, 2015).
The program creates a hands-on learning environment that teaches students to embrace
school spirit leadership and how to be a philanthropist at any age. By participating in the dance-
at-thon, students shape a valuable experience, which in turn develops young alumni giving.
Additionally, students gain an understanding of the cause, while developing important leadership
and communications skills.

30

This case study examines three robust youth philanthropy initiatives at Penn State. The
findings provide evidence that individuals who have participated in student philanthropy
programs are more likely to be engaged in the community and become “real” philanthropists in
terms of donating their time, talents and treasures. Since there have been no studies regarding the
long-term effects of youth philanthropy programs, more research is required regarding the lasting
impacts on the participants and the metrics used to evaluate such research. Areas of future
concentration might include methods of cultivating young philanthropists, young volunteers, and
young decision makers. Additionally, longitudinal studies might seek to understand the impact of
student philanthropy initiatives on adults later in life.

31

Chapter Four: Application
The youth philanthropy field has developed and changed over the last several years.
Youth philanthropy initiatives are underway in most communities. These programs not only
engage young people in philanthropy but also help youth understand how their time, talent, and
treasure can effect change in the community to continue to further the common good.
I have conducted my literature review and case study and looked at each of these youth
philanthropy initiatives with the intention of identifying how I can use the information to
positively impact my community through the work I am involved in within the nonprofit sector.
I have identified a number of areas of application for my work. First and foremost, there
must be more opportunities to engage youth in service learning opportunities. Creating additional
community partnerships to not only engage new potential volunteers but also strengthen
relationships with local organizations in the community is imperative to the longevity of youth
philanthropy.
While serving as a service learning community partner for several high school and
college students, I had the opportunity to gain a new understanding of what interests young
people to volunteer with an organization. All of the students expressed the desire to better
understand issues in the community and to help others. Their only wish was that there were more
opportunities for mentorship to gain a more well-rounded knowledge in their field of choice. For
example, the college students desired more volunteer opportunities aligned to their specific
degree program. This would provide students applicable knowledge in the field they are most
interested in pursuing.
While I have spent most of my professional time with older youth and young adults, I
believe that younger students would benefit from these partnerships as well. Through my

32

research, it has been proven students who volunteer are more connected and passionate about
issues in the community and their commitment to serving continuously grows. I would be
interested to see the potential of these community partnerships, particularly with local middle
schools.
To achieve this task, I propose collaborating with local nonprofits, schools, public
agencies, and community and faith-based groups. By developing a plan to partner youth with
organizations, young people will be able to not only act but also achieve their philanthropic
mission and values. Implementing this service learning opportunity would appeal to potential
funders to highlight the benefits of providing resources to stimulate existing partnerships in the
community. In addition to providing students with service learning opportunities, it would be
well advised to communicate with students more frequently to gain a better understanding of
what opportunities would be beneficial to their experience.
Although adult partnerships offer students the opportunity to gain new perspectives, it
would be most beneficial to form more student-led mission activities. Young people are ready to
be leaders; they simply just need proper guidance and resources to do so. Youth possesses a level
of energy and passion for serving the community that is contagious and inspiring to their peers.
Due to this reason, it would be valuable to increase student-led groups that can be engaged in
philanthropic activities. To achieve this, organizations must gain buy-in from schools and faculty
to understand that young people are a vital part of philanthropy for not only the organization but
also the community.
By attending local community fairs, school volunteer fairs, and other related activities,
nonprofit organizations can gain more recognition and a presence among youth in the
community. It would also be advantageous for youth-serving organizations to offer a summer

33

internship program for high school students. Communities can offer a substantial amount of
resources to help people and organizations in need via fundraising, grant making, collecting
donations, and volunteering by engaging youth in development activities. The participants’
engagement at these young ages will better prepare them for a possible future career or volunteer
role in the nonprofit sector.
Development professionals should hold a responsibility to engage youth in philanthropy.
I can do so by participating in groups such as youth ministries, various youth organizations, and
networking groups, like Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP). These programs are
great opportunities that I can personally become more involved in to ensure young people in my
community are learning and actively engaged in philanthropy.
There is a need for children and youth to be engaged in this community, especially the
surrounding rural, low-income neighboring communities. By spearheading change and getting
others passionate about the movement, I would like to see more Association of Fundraising
Professionals chapter members partnering with local schools to provide much-needed mentorship
to students in the community. The adult partnerships are instrumental to the development of our
children and youth. Chapter members can play a key role in training and sharing resources to
educational administrators so that philanthropy initiatives can begin to be implemented in varies
activities and curricula in the local school systems. The support of family, faith-based groups,
school systems, and the many forms of adult partnerships allows there to be a promise of youth
in philanthropy.
As nonprofit professionals, we have a responsibility to act as mentors, guides, and
teachers. To teach youth about philanthropy ensures the next generation understands the value
philanthropy has in their own lives, and how they can make an impact in the community and

34

world around them through these acts of service for others. In preparation for tomorrow, the
progress of youth philanthropy holds a significant importance in the nonprofit sector and the
commitment to making the world around us a better place.

35

Chapter Five: Recommendations
This section explores the ways in which organizations can further optimize their efforts to
empower young people. It also discusses the main challenges that these organizations face along
the program cycle and proposes recommendations to enhance the impact of their efforts.
Research indicates that the benefits of engaging youth in a variety of disciplines at an
early age are tremendously visible and positive. By providing opportunities for growth, we are
providing opportunities for success. Engaging youth through education and other civic programs
allows the individuals to learn valuable skills they can implement into their personal lives.
Philanthropy allows individuals to express their love for humanity through acts of service in their
communities, their families, and groups of friends.
Lessons Learned
Throughout my research, I have discovered a plethora of best practices in youth
philanthropy. There is no perfect model but rather a framework for understanding the principles
to teach and practice philanthropy to children and youth. This capstone is a product of months of
extensive research, delving into the inner frameworks of youth philanthropy education and
programs throughout the country. During this time, I have had the opportunity to gain
fundamental insights of leading practitioners in the field. One such practitioner, LaToria
Thomas, co-founder of Emerging Philanthropists of New Orleans stated, “It is important that we
as adults acknowledge how we can be partners to youth. First, we must recognize how many
youth are engaged and how do we influence more? By helping young people understand what
issues in our community are not being met and help develop habits of giving and serving, we are

36

creating opportunities for youth form into the next generation of philanthropists, while shaping
the communities around us for the common good.” (Thomas, 2015).
In order for youth philanthropy initiatives to effectively advance, there must be broader
access to philanthropy for youth, centralized resources and improved knowledge about youth
philanthropy programs, along with continued opportunities for training and engagement in
activities. With the right resources and training, young people can begin to learn philanthropic
values and unleash their philanthropic potential, benefiting the community and themselves.
Most programs are designed to specifically work with disadvantaged youth. However,
identifying and accessing “at-risk” youth can be particularly difficult, especially in a region with
limited resources. Certain youth programs have been unsuccessful due to the lack of resources
available to connect service learning and differentiating ways to target youth to become more
involved in philanthropy.
Recommendations
Through this capstone, three recommendations have been developed to improve youth
philanthropy. First, centralized resources will increase youth’s awareness and curiosity regarding
philanthropy. In addition to centralizing resources on how to identify, cultivate, and retain youth
in these civic engagement programs, it is also important that youth are engaged at different
levels.
By finding how youth and related organizations best communicate, a centralized resource
and method of communication can be created for individuals to access information regarding
youth philanthropy. This hub for information can provide the essential information regarding
youth programs, resources, and stories. It takes resources to do something well; knowledge is

37

power. Centralizing access to resources on youth philanthropy provides an infrastructure for
programs to more easily be shared and successfully developed. In a technology-driven society,
creating an online network to access, share, and receive information is vital for communities to
remain actively engaged and create new channels of networks for building stronger communities
of philanthropists.
Furthermore, participating in civic engagement opportunities allows young people to
grow into thriving adults and increase the well-being of the next generation.
Organizations have
the wonderful opportunity to seek funding to demonstrate how youth have been engaged in
philanthropy through civic engagement. Organizations whose strategic focus is largely related to
youth should consider establishing partnerships with youth-led civil society groups, who could
provide input from the onset of overall strategic planning. Having youth organizations as part of
these organization’s selection committees or boards could also be considered. More importantly,
programs must be accessible to the most vulnerable sections of youth. (OECD, 2014)

Youth must be viewed as the present, not just the future. A shared vision among those in
the field gives an understanding of how philanthropy can be a tool for change in the community.
This systematic change in attitudes and culture brings hope to create progressive change the
philanthropic sector.
Philanthropy has many definitions, depending on the audience. To ensure that young
people are properly educated and engaged, we must remember to approach youth holistically.
Young people are a multi-dimensional group facing hard, competitive demands from society. For
example, every year nearly 15,000 students in Louisiana drop out. The consequences from this
for communities are real: Students who drop out are eight times more likely to become
incarcerated or unemployed. City Year is turning this around by using near-peer mentors and

38

addressing specific areas that lead to students dropping out. City Year is rebuilding Baton
Rouge’s most underserved schools. (City Year Baton Rouge, 2015)
This youth-serving organization is helping equip young people to reach their full
potential. To help students stay on track, volunteers provide support through role modeling and
tutoring. Since 2005, City Year Baton Rouge has impacted thousands of students across the state
of Louisiana by improving students overall academic performance, helping earn better grades,
and creating better behavior through positive learning environments.
Finally, a supplementary opportunity to engage youth is to implement a school-based K-
12 philanthropy program that is built on the philanthropic needs of communities. This approach
would allow gained momentum in the youth philanthropy movement. An interview with Patricia
O. Bjorhovde, CFRE, former Chair of AFP's Youth in Philanthropy Task Force, offered
background information on this curriculum: “AFP created a comprehensive curriculum for youth
that would give each child the opportunity to participate in philanthropy, including learning
about the needs of the community, utilizing their time and talents, and understanding the
importance of personal giving. This curriculum was originally intended for high school aged
children, but it has been used in junior high quite successfully as well. The intention has always
been to add a companion piece for elementary in the future.” An optimistic goal would be to
have more than half of schools in the United States teaching philanthropy as part of the core
curriculums in five years. Ultimately the goal is to have the curriculum universally accepted in
twenty years (AFP, 2007). This would require the cooperation of teachers, parents, and an array
of nonprofit professionals to collaborate on such an effort.
Philanthropy is vital to America’s youth. Through philanthropy, we can equip young
people to better understand their prominence as tomorrow’s volunteers, donors, leaders, and

39

teachers. Implementing such a curriculum in schools and youth organizations will only be
possible with the universal acceptance of these concepts and the collaboration and instrumental
guidance from educational administrators. These curricula must be made accessible to as many
people as possible and also be age, grade, gender, and community specific. This may require
materials to be translated into multiple languages and share through wide-ranging levels of
communications.
The purpose of this curriculum is to connect service learning so that each child can
become developed philanthropists, and upon graduation will support causes and embrace what
they learned as younger students. Although some of these young people may eventually work in
the private sector, these teachings will relate mutually to corporate social responsibility. For
example, a local branch of a library could donate funds to a local after-school arts program for
children, match the philanthropic donations of their employees to a charitable organization, or
volunteer their time at a local fundraising event. Training and additional resources would be
necessary to prepare these individuals to meet the need of implement philanthropy initiatives into
a standard school curriculum. Examples would include, teachers are well educated on how to
integrate and teach philanthropy in their classrooms. By differentiating the types of philanthropy
to be taught and the resources connecting service learning we can successfully integrate
philanthropy into education.
Further research also needs to be done on how we can facilitate curriculums into school
systems and on ways to engage youth beyond school. Who do we involve in these processes?
How can we overcome the limitations from others? This can be done in a variety of ways such as
longitudinal research studies in academia or service organizations.

40

Further Research
In addition to implementing a curriculum, adults should support youth in participating in
local youth programs. Adults working in youth-serving organizations value the enthusiasm
young people have and understand the complex process involved to properly develop youth. By
participating in these programs, youth are able to apply knowledge learned by actively being
engaged in the community. The collaboration between schools and local community groups will
be vital to the longevity of these implemented curricula in the school systems. The objective is to
fully immerse youth in philanthropy, both in a formal school setting and in the community.
Many organizations view youth and adults as equal partners and seek to provide service-learning
opportunities so students will continue to be fully engaged participants and grow through a
commitment to philanthropy, service, and become leaders in the community.
Because youth-serving organizations emphasize the importance and influence
philanthropy has on youth, they must work harder to ensure more opportunities are available for
young people. Organizations play a vital role in engaging foundations, community organizations,
and potential funders to ensure the appropriate amounts of resources are available for youth to
actively participate in philanthropy. Additionally, training must be provided to help integrate
youth philanthropy effectively into already existing programs and operations.
In order to bring about real change, it is essential that the long-term impact youth
philanthropy has on the community be communicated effectively. The ways in which youth are
affected, benefited, and impacted by philanthropy provides a fresh perspective on how programs
can be improved and what resources are needed to enhance young people’s experience.
With the right resources and training, youth can begin to learn and understand
philanthropy. The world in which today’s young people study, work and socialize changes

41

quickly, which is why these resources must be reactive and remain relevant to meet the needs of
the community.
Conclusion
The opportunities to accelerate the advancement of youth in philanthropy in communities
across the country are endless. The enthusiasm and energy for philanthropy young people have
inspired others to participate in and spread philanthropy. By engaging youth in philanthropy,
young people will begin to form into the next generation of philanthropists, creating better
communities and ultimately changing the world.
Youth have the opportunity to be advocates for change but are often unheard. By
amplifying the voice of youth through open dialogue and positive engagement, young people are
now, more than ever, capable of keeping the tradition of giving and serving for the common
good alive. By transmitting the values of philanthropy, beliefs, and the skills necessary to make
it possible, philanthropy can be shared for generations to come. The work must begin now to
nurture these relationships and to ultimately strengthen the emerging field of youth in
philanthropy.

42

References
Agard, K. A. (2002). Learning to give: Teaching philanthropy K-12. New Directions for Philanthropic
Fundraising 2002(36), 37–54. doi: 10.1002/pf.3603
Allen, P. (2003). Youth and philanthropy: Legal issues, practical consequences. New Directions for
Philanthropic Fundraising 2002(38), 49–66. doi: 10.1002/pf.17
Amish America. (2010). What happens at an Amish barn raising? Retrieved 2015 from
http://amishamerica.com/what-happens-at-an-amish-barn-raising/
American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Civic Engagement. Retrieved 2015 from
http://www.apa.org/education/undergrad/civic-engagement.aspx.
American's promise: Opportunities to help others. (2007). Retrieved May 15, 2007, from
http://www.americaspromise.org/APAPage.aspx?id=6380
Association of Fundraising Professionals NJ Chapter (n.d.). Youth in Philanthropy. Retrieved 2015 from
http://www.afp-nj.org/programs-events/youth-in-philanthropy/.
Bentley, R. J., & Nissan, L. G. (1996). The rooms of giving and serving: A literature review studying
how school-age children learn the philanthropic tradition Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University
Center on Philanthropy
Berkshire, J. (2015). 75% of young adults gave to charity last year, study finds. Retrieved 2015 from
https://philanthropy.com/article/75-of-Young-Adults-Gave-to/156477
Bjorhovde, P. O. (2002). Teaching philanthropy to children: Why, how, and what. New directions for
philanthropic fundraising, 2002 (36), 7–20. doi: 10.1002/pf.3601
Bjorhovde, Patricia (Nonprofit Consultant). Personal Interview, August 19, 2014.
Blacklaws, C. (2015). Between corporate philanthropy and development: A nexus of funding strategies
for achieving optimal results (Doctoral dissertation, Saint Mary’s University).

43

Bloomberg, L., Ganey, A., Alba, V., Quintero, G., & Alvarez Alcantara, L. (2003). Chicano-Latino
youth leadership institute: An asset-based program for youth. American Journal of Health
Behavior, 27(1), S45–S54.
Bokoff, J & Dillon, A. (2014). Scanning the landscape of youth philanthropy: Observations and
recommendations for strengthening a growing field. Retrieved 2015, from
http://foundationcenter.org/gainknowledge/research/pdf/youth_philanthropy_2014.pdf
Calhoun, J. A. (2002). Claiming youth: A new paradigm in youth policy. New Directions for
philanthropic fundraising, 2002 (38), 67–80. DOI: 10.1002/pf.18
Center for Youth As Resources (CYAR) and the National Endowment for Financial Education (NEFE).
“Making change for the better: the importance of youth giving”. November 2015.
Chea, H. (2015). Youth in philanthropy board. Retrieved 2016 from http://www.gtcf.org/ypb
City Year Baton Rouge. (2015). What we do. Retrieved 2016 from https://www.cityyear.org/batonrouge
Collins, Dennis A. Foreword to “Changing the face of giving: An assessment of youth philanthropy”,
San Francisco, October 2014. Cooper, M., & Cooper, G. (2008). Overcoming barriers to the
positive development and engagement of ethno-racial minority youth in Canada (pp. 446–469).
Department of Canadian Heritage, Alberta District.
Crestinger, Mary. "The benefits of youth philanthropy programs." (1999) Youth Philanthropy: A
Framework of Best Practice. Retrieved 2015 from
http://www.wkkf.org/Pubs/PhilVol/Pub557.pdf.
Dashefsky, A. & Lazerwitz, B. (2009). Charitable choices: Philanthropic decisions of donors in the
American Jewish community. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Falk, K. H., & Nissan, L. G. (2007). A vision for and brief history of youth philanthropy. Association of
Fundraising Professionals Reports on Fundraising and Philanthropy, 1.

44

Four Diamonds Fund. (2016).Ways to give. Retrieved 2016 from http://www.fourdiamonds.org/ways-
to-give/#ways-to-givethon
Garza, P., & Stevens, P. (2002). Best practices in youth philanthropy. Coalition of Community
Foundations for Youth, Basehor, Kansas.
Gazley, B. & Winstel, A. (2015) Engaging students and young alumni: The importance of cultivating
the next generation of donors. ASHE Higher Education Report, 37(2), 65–70.
Ginwright, S., & James, T. (2002). From assets to agents of change: Social justice, organizing, and
youth development. New directions for youth development, 2002(96), 27–46. doi: 10.1002/yd.25
Goldseker, S. (2009). Beyond duty and obligation: Engaging the next generation. Journal Of Jewish
Communal Service, 84(1/2), 115–120.
Graney, Suzanne (Director of Four Diamonds Fund, Pennsylvania State University). Personal Interview,
November 18, 2015.
Gummere, S. L. (2003). Making a better place: planning, implementing, & managing a student
volunteer program (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon).
Hallett, Geoff (Director of Student and Recent Graduate Programs: Annual Giving Programs,
Pennsylvania State University). Personal Interview, November 17, 2015.
Hill, M., & Stevens, D. (2010). Measuring the impossible: Scoping study for longitudinal research on
the impact of youth volunteering. Institute for Volunteering Research, 28-35.
Hollander, E., & Burack, C. (2009). How young people develop long-lasting habits of civic engagement:
A conversation on building a research agenda. Retrieved 2015.
Hostetler, J. A. (Ed.). (1989). Amish roots: a treasury of history, wisdom, and lore. JHU Press.

45

Indiana University Lilly Family School. (2013) "How parents teach children about charitable giving
matters, new study finds." Retrieved 2015 from http://news.iupui.edu/releases/2013/09/children-
charitable-study.shtml
Johnson, P. D., Johnson, S. P., & Kingman, A. (2004). Promoting philanthropy: Global challenges and
approaches. BertelsmannStiftung, Paper, 2.
Koch, D. (2013). Community resources. Retrieved 2016 from
http://www.fortbendchamber.com/community-resources
Learning to Give. (n.d.). Glossary of philanthropic terms. Retrieved 2015 from
http://learningtogive.org/resources/vocabulary.asp.
Lecy, J. D., & Searing, E. A. (2015). Anatomy of the nonprofit starvation cycle: an analysis of falling
overhead ratios in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(3), 539-
563. doi:10.1177/089976401452717
Lendermon, S. (2014). Youth philanthropy grants. Retrieved 2015 from http://cfcbr.org/youth-
philanthropy-grants/
Lerner, R. M., & Simon, L. A. K. (Eds.). (2014). University-community collaborations for the Maryland
State Department of Education. Graduation Requirements. Retrieved 2015 from:
http://marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/programs/servicelearning/docs/requirements.html
Melaville, A., Berg, A. C., & Blank, M. J. (2006). Community-based learning: Engaging students for
success and citizenship.
Musau, C. N. (2014). Understanding the impact of Harambee tradition on the philanthropic activities of
Kenyan immigrants in the Twin Cities (Doctoral dissertation). Saint Mary's University of
Minnesota.

46

National Youth Development Information Center. The Younger Americans Act. Retrieved on November
1, 2015, from http://www.nydic.org/nydic/yaanew/YAA.html.
Nelson, L. I. (1998). Helping youth thrive: How youth organizations can--and do--build developmental
assets. Search Institute.
Nissan, L. G. (2007, October). The growth of youth philanthropy in the United States. Retrieved on
March 15, 2009, from Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University Web site:
http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/Millennium/resources.aspx
Paul, A., & Lefkovitz, B. (2006). Engaging youth: a how-to guide for creating opportunities for young
people to participate, lead and succeed. Sierra Health Foundation.
Philanthropy News Digest. (2013). Next-gen donors focused on values, impact, hands-on engagement.
Retrieved from http://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/next-gen-donors-focused-on-values-
impact-hands-on-engagement-report-finds
Pratt, Carolyn, Brend Hunt, and Jennifer Owen. “Conducting needs assessment.” National Youth
Philanthropy Conference, 1996.
Olberding, J. C. (2012). Does student philanthropy work? A study of long-term effects of the “Learning
by Giving” approach. Innovative Higher Education, 37(2), 71–87.
Rosen, M. and Maureen Sedonaen. “Changing the face of giving: an assessment of youth philanthropy.”
(2001). Youth Leadership Institute. Retrieved on September 12, 2015, from
.http://www.irvine.org/assets/pdf/pubs/youth/Youth_Philanthropy.pdf.
Safrit, R. D. (2002). Developing Effective Teen--Adult Partnerships through volunteerism:
strengthening empathy, engagement, empowerment, and enrichment. Journal of Volunteer
Administration, 20(4), 21-26.

47

Smith, R. (n.d.). What Is At-Risk Youth? - Definition & Statistics. Retrieved May 22, 2016, from
http://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-at-risk-youth-definition-statistics.html
Spring, K., Dietz, N., & Grimm Jr, R. (2006). Educating for Active Citizenship: Service-Learning,
School-Based Service, and Youth Civic Engagement. Youth Helping America
Series. Corporation for National and Community Service.
Swanson, N. (2002). The power of YOUth in philanthropic fundraising. New Directions for
Philanthropic Fundraising, (36), 91–100. DOI: 10.1002/pf.3606
Tempel, Eugene R. (2004). “Philanthropy summit report, April 13, 2004”. Available at:
http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/events/philanthropysummit/philsummit04.pdf Indiana, p.13.
The Indiana University Lily School of Philanthropy. (2014) Understanding philanthropy education in K-
12 Schools: a typology. Retrieved 2015, from http://www.ypin.org/Portals/0/PDFs/2014-
Philanthropy-Education-Final-Report.pdf
The Pennsylvania State University. (2015) THON 2016: The big reveal. Retrieved 2016 from
http://www.psu.edu/feature/2016/02/21/thon-2016-big-reveal
Thomas, LaToria (Donor Services Program Officer, Baton Rouge Area Foundation). Personal Interview,
August 20, 2015.
Tice, K. E. (2002). Engaging youth in philanthropy. New directions for philanthropic
fundraising, 2002(38), 5–18. doi 10.1002/pf.14
W.K. Kellogg Foundation. “Kellogg youth initiatives partnerships overview”. Retrieved August 2015
from: www.wkkf.org/default.aspx?tabid=75&CID=163&NID=61&Langu ageID=0.
Waibel‐Duncan, M. K., Benner, E., & Weeks, M. (2012). YOO Rock Columbia County: Development
of a volunteer reference guide for families, children, and youth. Journal of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Nursing, 25(2), 91–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6171.2012.00330.x

48

We Day. (2015). Our impact. Retrieved 2015 from http://www.weday.com/what-is-we-day/we-days-
impact/
Zeldin, S., & Camino, L. (1999). Youth leadership: Linking research and program theory to exemplary
practice. Research and practice: Completing the Circle. New Designs for Youth
Development, 15(1), 10–15
Zeldin, S., Camino, L., & Calvert, M. (2007). Toward an understanding of youth in community
governance: Policy priorities and research directions. Análise Psicológica, 25(1), 77-
95. doi: 10.14417/ap.431
Zeldin, S., Krauss, S. E., Collura, J., Lucchesi, M., & Sulaiman, A. H. (2014). Conceptualizing and
measuring youth–adult partnership in community programs: A cross-national study. American
journal of community psychology, 54(3-4), 337-347. doi: 10.1007/s10464-014-9676-9

49

Appendixes
This appendix contains samples of all the participant interviews. Separate conclusions
concerning best practices in youth philanthropy were derived from the data.
List of Interviews
Interview 1: Patricia Bjorhovde: Nonprofit Consultant
Date of Interview: August 19, 2014
Interview 2: LaToria Thomas: Donor Services Officer, Baton Rouge Area Foundation
Date of Interview: August 20, 2015
Interview 3: Geoff Hallett: Director of Student and Recent Graduate Programs: Annual Giving
Programs, Pennsylvania State University
Date of Interview: November 17, 2015
Interview 4: Suzanne Graney: Director of Four Diamonds Fund, Pennsylvania State University
Date of Interview: November 18, 2015
Interview Questions
1. Tell me a little about your background in youth philanthropy.
2. What is your role or that of youth within your organization or overall giving? Is there a model
you can share?
3. How do you ensure that youth are active participants in all facets of your organization and the
community?
4. What skills and knowledge do the adults bring to working with youth as partners? What skills
and knowledge does youth have to these types of partnerships?
5. How does your organization define youth? Is there an age range, and are your programs
specifically associated with one group of youth, or are they designed for other purposes?

50

6. Why is it so important to engage youth in philanthropy?
7. What barriers to youth philanthropy initiatives have you identified? How have you overcome
these challenges?
8. What recommendations do you have to improve the impact of philanthropy and development in
youth and the nonprofit sector?
9. What resources are needed to grow youth philanthropy programs?
10. Where do you want youth philanthropy to grow?

Capstone_ Marci E. Gaines_July 2016

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Capstone_ Marci E. Gaines_July 2016

Similar to Capstone_ Marci E. Gaines_July 2016 (20)

Capstone_ Marci E. Gaines_July 2016