Version Notes

Version 2.0: 09/26/2018

This version corrects data discrepancies caused by layout error in the original version. To download the updated report, please return to the report page and follow the instructions on the bottom of the page. Thank you!


  • Exhibit 1 (p. 5): The n for “Associate” has been corrected to 42 from 59
  • Exhibit 7 (p. 12): n’s have been updated for three statements on the right hand side of the table for respondents identifying as “Not LGBTQ”
  • Exhibit 8 (p. 13): The rate of agreement among non-grantmaking staff for the statement: "the people that lead my institution care as deeply about social justice and equity as I do,” is corrected from 38 percent (n=76) to 76 percent (n=17
  • Exhibit 9 (p. 14): Two data labels have been corrected
    • The first data label: “My institution’s work is relevant to what’s happening in the world today,” is corrected to “My institution makes it possible for grantees to provide feedback without fear of reprisal."
    • The third data label: "In my institution, we talk openly about equity during the course of our work (n=114)," is corrected to "My institution communicates internally and externally in accessible language that anyone can understand (n=113)"
  • Exhibit II (p. 19): "Midwest" is corrected to "Latino/Hispanic."


A Note on the Chronicle’s Article on Dissonance and Disconnects

On the day the report was released, the Chronicle of Philanthropy issued a report entitled “Half of Young Foundation Leaders Don’t Think Their Group’s Work Is Relevant.” Unfortunately, this headline reflected the mislabeled data point in exhibit 9, described above. According to our data, as described correctly in Exhibit 4 (p.8), 74 percent of respondents agree or strongly agree that their institution’s work is relevant to what’s happening in the world today. The Chronicle has been notified of the error and issued a correction on September 26th, 2018. We take full responsibility for this error and apologize for not having detected it sooner. All other data points appearing in the Chronicle article are correct.


Thank you! Please share any questions or feedback with us via