全球视野 | 2024美国顶级慈善捐赠人：坚持初心，还是随波逐流？

全球视野

每周从全球各大与公益慈善或社会创新领域相关的媒体或专业网站，去浏览发现当下正在发生的案例和正在思考的观点，然后翻译整理成篇，传达第一手的新鲜资讯。栏目希望可以通过文章的视角或者表述，为会员伙伴们提供启发、打开视野。

文章《America’s Mega-Donors Stuck to Their Giving Strategies in 2024/2024年，美国巨额捐赠人坚持其捐赠策略》发布在慈善纪事报/The Chronicle of Philanthropy上。这篇文章探讨了2024年美国大额慈善捐赠人的捐赠策略，强调了他们如何坚持既定的捐赠方向，而未受外界趋势影响。文章介绍了迈克尔·布隆伯格、麦肯锡·斯科特、梅琳达·弗伦奇·盖茨等知名捐赠人的捐赠动向，并探讨了慈善界围绕政治、社会议题的争议。此外，文章分析了大额捐赠的现状及挑战，指出尽管超高净值人士财富增长迅速，但他们的捐赠比例依然较低，同时，一些捐赠人正采取更具战略性的方法，以确保慈善资金的有效运用。

Giving back has been part of Michael Bloomberg’s life for as long he can remember. The former New York City mayor and financial-news company founder says his parents taught him that everyone has a responsibility to make the world a better place. He took that to heart as an Eagle Scout and in his early years at the financial-services firm Salomon Brothers, where he says philanthropy was part of the culture. 

回馈社会一直是迈克尔·布隆伯格生活的一部分，自他记事起便如此。这位前纽约市市长兼财经新闻公司创始人表示，他的父母教导他，每个人都有责任让世界变得更美好。他对此铭记于心，无论是在童年时期担任雄鹰童子军（美国童子军中的最高荣誉），还是早年在所罗门兄弟金融服务公司工作时，他说慈善事业是公司文化的一部分。 

Over decades as a prominent philanthropist, he has found that there is real joy in seeing the difference he has made. 

作为一位知名的慈善家，布隆伯格数十年来深刻体会到，亲眼见证自己带来的改变，会让他感到真正的快乐。 

“I’ve never understood people who wait until they die to give away their wealth. Why deny yourself the satisfaction?” he wrote in an email to the Chronicle. “I’ve been very lucky, and I’m determined to do what I can to open doors for others and to leave a better world for my children and grandchildren.” 

布隆伯格在给《慈善纪事报》的一封电子邮件中写道：“我从来都不能理解那些等到去世才捐出财富的人。为什么要剥夺自己的这种满足感？我非常幸运，所以我下定决心尽自己所能为他人创造机会，并为我的子孙后代留下一个更美好的世界。” 

For the second year in a row, Bloomberg tops our Philanthropy 50 list of the year’s biggest donors. This year, he gave a total of $3.7 billion to support arts, education, environment, and public-health groups, and to back programs aimed at improving city governments. He gives directly to charities and through his Bloomberg Philanthropies, which last year awarded a $1 billion grant to his alma mater, Johns Hopkins University, to make medical school free and to provide financial aid to nursing and public-health students. 

布隆伯格连续两年荣登《慈善纪事报》年度慈善50强捐赠人榜首。今年，他共捐赠了37亿美元，支持艺术、教育、环境和公共卫生领域的组织，并资助旨在改善城市治理的项目。他通过直接向慈善机构捐赠以及通过其“布隆伯格慈善基金会”进行捐助。去年，该基金会向他的母校约翰·霍普金斯大学提供了10亿美元的资助，用于免除医学院学费，并为护理和公共卫生专业的学生提供经济援助。 

“Johns Hopkins took a chance on me, and the doors it opened led me to where I am today,” Bloomberg wrote. “I want to give more young people the chance that Hopkins gave me.” 

布隆伯格写道：“约翰·霍普金斯大学当初给了我一个机会，它为我打开了一扇门，让我有了今天的成就。我希望能让更多年轻人获得霍普金斯曾给过我的机会。” 

Bloomberg was one of six donors who gave $1 billion or more in 2024. The others were Reed Hastings and Patty Quillin (No. 2), Michael and Susan Dell (No. 3), Warren Buffett (No. 4), Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg (No. 5), and Ruth Gottesman (No. 6). The majority of those gifts went to foundations and donor-advised funds that support causes including education, economic mobility, social justice, and scientific research. Gottesman, like Bloomberg, gave to make medical school free. She donated $1 billion to the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. 

布隆伯格是2024年六位捐赠超过10亿美元的捐赠人之一。其他五位分别是里德·哈斯廷斯和帕蒂·奎林（第二名）、迈克尔和苏珊·戴尔（第三名）、沃伦·巴菲特（第四名）、普莉希拉·陈和马克·扎克伯格（第五名）、以及露丝·戈特斯曼（第六名）。这些捐赠大多数流向了支持教育、经济流动性、社会正义和科学研究等事业的基金会和捐赠人建议基金。戈特斯曼与布隆伯格一样，他们的捐赠都用于免除医学院学费，戈特斯曼向阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦医学院捐赠了10亿美元。

The year was marked by some big public debates about philanthropy. MacKenzie Scott’s streak of multimillion-dollar grants to nonprofits continued, bringing her total giving to $19.2 billion since 2019. Scott does not appear on the Philanthropy 50 list because she conducts her giving through donor-advised funds. While it’s possible she made gifts to one or more of those funds that would have earned her a spot on the Philanthropy 50, she and her representatives declined to provide such information to the Chronicle. 

今年，公众对慈善领域展开了一些重大的讨论。麦肯锡·斯科特继续向非营利组织捐赠数百万美元，使她自2019年以来的总捐赠额达到192亿美元。斯科特没有出现在“慈善50强”的名单上，是因为她通过捐赠人建议基金进行捐赠。虽然她可能向一个或多个此类基金捐赠了足够的款项，能使她进入慈善50强的名单，但她和她的代表拒绝向《慈善纪事报》提供相关信息。 

Melinda French Gates (No. 7) left the Gates Foundation last year, and in many of her media appearances, she made powerful arguments for the importance of philanthropy and her own focus on the empowerment of women and girls. Meanwhile, other donors — most notably hedge-fund billionaire Bill Ackman — pushed back against the institutions they have supported, criticizing universities’ response to the October 7 attacks in Israel and campus protests against the war in Gaza; critiquing diversity, equity, and inclusion programs; demanding changes; and pledging to halt support. 

梅琳达·弗伦奇·盖茨（第七名）去年离开了比尔和梅琳达·盖茨基金会，在她的许多次媒体亮相中，她强力主张慈善事业的重要性，并强调自己专注于女性和女孩赋权的工作。与此同时，其他捐赠人——其中最著名的是对冲基金亿万富翁比尔·阿克曼，则对他们支持的机构提出反对：批评大学对10月7日以色列袭击事件，以及校园内反对加沙战争的抗议活动的反应；批评多样性、公平性和包容性（DEI）项目；要求进行改革，并承诺停止支持。 

Despite the uproar by Ackman and others, there isn’t much evidence that these calls for donors to abandon certain universities have affected their fundraising over the past year, says Brian Flahaven, vice president for strategic partnerships at the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, which assists colleges and universities with alumni relations, communications, and fundraising. 

布莱恩·弗拉哈文表示：尽管比尔·阿克曼和其他人发出了强烈的反对声音，但在过去一年里，要求捐赠人放弃某些大学的呼声似乎并未显著影响这些大学的筹款情况。弗拉哈文是美国教育促进与支持委员会/Council for Advancement and Support of Education（该委员会帮助大学和学院处理校友关系、沟通和筹款事务）的战略合作副总裁。 

“Beyond the high-profile cases, we haven’t heard that this has been widespread,” he says. “Regardless of their own political perspective, when donors are giving to institutions, there’s some mission-driven reason, whether it’s medical research, whether they had a great experience, or they are trying to give back in terms of financial aid.” 

弗拉哈文说：“除了这些备受关注的个案之外，我们还没听说这种现象已经普遍存在。不论捐赠人自身的政治立场如何，当他们向机构捐赠时，通常都有某种使命驱动的原因，无论是支持医学研究，还是因为他们曾在这里有过美好经历，或者是他们希望通过经济援助来给予回馈。” 

But some donors are loath to get ensnared in high-profile polarizing issues, says Renee Kaplan, CEO of the donor advisory firm Forward Global. As a result, she says, some donors are staying out of the fray by making anonymous donations. Others are working together in donor collaboratives, both to boost their power and resources and to shield individual contributors from criticism. 

捐赠人咨询公司Forward Global的CEO蕾妮·卡普兰表示：但有些捐赠人不愿卷入引人注目的两极分化问题。因此，她说，一些捐赠人通过匿名捐赠的方式置身事外。另一些则通过捐赠人合作组织联合起来，既是为了增强他们的力量和资源，也为了保护个人捐赠人免受抨击。 

Donors are starting to say, “I’ll do more anonymously. I’m not going to put my name on things. I’m going to slow down our foundation for a while because I’m worried I’ll be a target,” Kaplan says. “I think there’s genuine concern and pause and fear that’s affecting donors.” 

卡普兰说：“捐赠人开始说，‘我会更多地匿名捐赠。我不打算把我的名字放在这些事情上。我会暂时放慢我们基金会的步伐，因为我担心自己会成为攻击目标。’我认为，捐赠人确实存在这些担忧、犹豫和恐惧，这些情绪正在影响他们。” 

Other donors are pushing back against the criticism, says Stephanie Ellis-Smith, CEO of Phīla Engaged Giving, a philanthropic advisory firm. She says some donors who have been on the fence are starting to fund initiatives that address racial inequity, and others are expressing interest and are learning more. 

慈善咨询公司Phīla Engaged Giving的CEO斯蒂芬妮·埃利斯-史密斯表示，其他捐赠人则在回击这种批评。她说，一些犹豫不决的捐赠人开始资助旨在解决种族不平等的项目，而另一些则表示出了兴趣并开始了解更多相关信息。 

This year Bloomberg gave $600 million through Bloomberg Philanthropies to support medical schools at historically Black colleges and universities, an important endorsement of those programs at schools that are often ignored by philanthropy and have small endowments to fall back on. 

今年，布隆伯格通过布隆伯格慈善基金会捐赠了6亿美元，用于支持美国传统黑人大学（HBCU）。这是对那些经常被慈善机构忽视、捐赠资金较少的学校项目的重要支持。 

“The data shows that Black patients have better health outcomes when they’re seen by Black doctors, and about half of all Black doctors in the U.S. are graduates of the four Historically Black Medical Schools,” he wrote in an email to the Chronicle. “Our support is helping to reduce student debt at those schools, which helps more of their students graduate and become doctors.” 

布隆伯格在发给《慈善纪事报》的一封电子邮件中写道：“数据显示，黑人患者在黑人医生的诊治下能获得更好的健康结果，而美国大约一半的黑人医生都毕业于四所传统黑人大学医学院。我们的支持有助于减少这些学校的学生债务，从而帮助更多的学生顺利毕业并成为医生。”

Some philanthropists believe that politicized public debates about giving are unhelpful noise that can get in the way of doing effective work. K. Lisa Yang (No. 34), a retired investment banker, gave $74.5 million this year, much of that to MIT and Cornell University, where she is a trustee. Yang has long supported research collaboratives at Harvard and MIT, where she says the universities’ different strengths complement each other. In 2024, she gave $10 million to the Yang Tan Collective, which brings scientists and engineers together to work on human health and well-being, a program she has supported for eight years. She also gave $28 million to start the K. Lisa Yang Global Engineering Research Center. 

一些慈善家认为，关于捐赠的政治化公开辩论是无益的噪音，可能会妨碍有效工作的开展。退休的投资银行家K·莉莎·杨（第34名）今年捐赠了7450万美元，其中大部分捐赠给了她担任董事会成员的麻省理工学院和康奈尔大学。杨长期以来一直支持哈佛和麻省理工学院的研究合作，她表示，这两所大学有不同的优势，可以互为补充。2024年，她向Yang Tan Collective捐赠了1000万美元，该项目将科学家和工程师聚集在一起，共同致力于研究人类健康与福祉，这是她支持了八年的项目。她还捐赠了2800万美元，用于启动K·莉莎·杨全球工程研究中心。 

Researchers in these programs collaborate across disciplines to conduct disruptive high-risk, high-reward research. In one case, that collaboration contributed to the first CRISPR gene therapy for an autism-spectrum disorder. The FDA authorized clinical trials in 2024, and initial trial participants are receiving treatment in early 2025. Her gift to Cornell enables researchers to examine wildlife health and the interactions between people and wildlife that can lead to the spread of diseases like the H1N1 virus. 

这些项目中的研究人员跨学科合作，开展颠覆性的高风险、高回报研究。在一个案例中，这种合作促成了首个治疗自闭症谱系障碍的CRISPR基因疗法。美国食品和药物管理局于2024年批准了临床试验，最初的试验参与者将于2025年初接受治疗。她对康奈尔大学的捐赠，使研究人员能够研究野生动物的健康状况，以及人与野生动物之间的互动，这些互动可能会导致像H1N1病毒这样的疾病传播。 

Environmental crises and neurological disorders are urgent issues that require timely and effective solutions — so Yang has little time for critics of these universities. She also supports diversity in the workplace by giving to a nonprofit that encourages employers to hire neurodiverse people. 

环境危机和神经系统疾病都是亟待解决的问题，需要及时有效的解决方案，因此杨没有时间去理会针对这些大学的批评。她还支持工作场所的多样性，向一家非营利组织捐款，以鼓励雇主雇用神经多样性人士。 

Yang says she needed to find the institutions that have the best talent to encourage collaboration and to build communities of researchers that can work together in the long run. When it comes to neuroscience, she says, that is Harvard and MIT, two of the institutions at the center of last year’s donor revolt. 

杨表示，她需要找到那些拥有最佳人才的机构，以促进合作，并建立能够长期协作的研究人员社区。在神经科学领域，她认为，这些机构就是哈佛和麻省理工学院。这两所大学正是去年捐赠人叛乱事件的核心。 

“The people who are suffering from these disorders, they don’t have the luxury of time,” she says. “When you have a rare disease and they do politics, to the people who are suffering from the disorder, it is totally irrelevant. They’re still suffering. I don’t want to get involved in that because then I can’t really focus on what’s important to the people who are suffering.” 

她说：“患有这些疾病的人没那么多的时间。当你患有罕见疾病，而他们却在搞政治，这对受苦于这些疾病的人来说，是完全无关紧要的。他们仍然在受苦。我不想卷入其中，因为那样的话，我就无法真正专注于对患者来说最重要的事情。”

Many of the ultra-high-net-worth donors who appear regularly on the Philanthropy 50 list are following giving strategies they developed a decade or more ago, says Alex Johnston, founding partner at Building Impact Partners, a philanthropy advisory firm. He says they’re not particularly swayed by the winds blowing one way or the other. 

慈善咨询公司Building Impact Partners的创始合伙人亚历克斯·约翰斯顿说，许多经常出现在慈善50强榜单上的超高净值捐赠人，都在遵循他们十几年前制定的捐赠策略。他说，这些捐赠人并不特别受到这种或那种风向的左右。 

“Many donors are directing their philanthropy where their attention is already focused, where they already have connections, and where a gift is meaningful for them,” he says. “There’s some personal relevance that creates feelings of fulfillment when they make that gift.” 

约翰斯顿说：“许多捐赠人将他们的慈善事业集中在他们已经关注的领域、已经有联系的地方，以及那些对他们有意义的捐赠对象。当他们做出捐赠时，这些领域会有某种个人相关性，从而带给他们满足感。” 

Often that involves local giving, Johnston says. Unlike other types of giving, donors can contribute to a community and causes they are familiar with and see the impact, sometimes in their daily lives. 

约翰斯顿表示，这通常涉及地方性捐赠。与其他类型的捐赠不同，捐赠人可以为他们熟悉的社区和事业做出贡献，并看到成效，有时还能在日常生活中看到其影响。 

That has been the case for Nancy and Richard Kinder (No. 37), who gave $60.02 million to their foundation in 2024. In 2011, the couple joined the Giving Pledge, which encourages wealthy people to commit to give at least half of their wealth to charity during their lifetimes or in their wills. Rather than giving a huge lump sum to their foundation and then doling out 5 percent of the endowment every year, the Kinders take a different approach. They keep enough money in the foundation to make sure they can cover all their obligations — in 2024, the foundation’s assets stood at $300.9 million. Then the couple put in additional money — about $50 million to $60 million each of the past several years — and the foundation gives out about the same amount that year. 

这对于南希和理查德·金德（第37名）来说就是如此，他们在2024年向他们的基金会捐赠了6002万美元。2011年，这对夫妇加入了“捐赠誓言”，该誓言鼓励富人承诺在其一生中或在遗嘱中，将至少一半的财富捐赠给慈善事业。金德夫妇采取了一种不同的方式，他们没有一次性向基金会捐出一大笔钱，然后每年拿出捐赠基金的5%。他们在基金会中保留了足够的资金，以确保该基金会能够承担所有的义务。到了2024年，该基金会的资产达到了3.009亿美元。然后，夫妇俩再投入额外的资金。在过去几年中，他们每年大约捐出5000万至6000万美元给基金会。而基金会每年捐赠的金额也大致在这个范围。 

The foundation’s grants can total in the tens of millions of dollars and are primarily focused on Houston, their hometown. The Kinders fund education and programs that aim to improve the quality of life for Houston residents, and they have been pivotal in the development of urban green space. This year, the Kinder Foundation gave $10 million to the Memorial Park Conservancy to support Memorial Groves, which educates the public about the 70,000 soldiers who trained there during World War I. 

基金会的资助总额可达数千万美元，主要集中在金德夫妇的家乡——休斯顿。金德夫妇资助教育和旨在改善休斯敦居民生活质量的项目，他们在城市绿地的开发中发挥了关键作用。今年，金德基金会向纪念公园保护协会捐赠了1000万美元，用于支持纪念林项目。该项目向公众普及有关第一次世界大战期间在那里训练的70000名士兵的历史。 

The couple has awarded more than $621 million since they began giving in the 1990s and plan to give about 95 percent of their wealth away. 

自1990年代开始捐赠以来，这对夫妇已累计捐赠超过6.21亿美元，并计划将约95%的财富捐赠出去。 

“We’re big believers in philanthropy, and we’re hands-on,” Richard Kinder says. “We thought we could really make a difference if we concentrated our efforts here in Houston. We picked urban green space, education, and quality of life because we thought those were three areas that most of the philanthropies were not concentrating on.” 

理查德·金德说：“我们非常相信慈善，并且亲力亲为。我们认为，如果我们把力量集中在休斯顿，就能真正有所作为。我们选择了城市绿地、教育和生活质量这三方面，因为我们认为这三个领域是大多数慈善机构所没有关注的。” 

And they’re engaged donors. They often visit the parks that they have helped to support, and if a water fountain isn’t working or a light is broken, they are quick to call the director of their foundation and let him know. 

金德夫妇也是参与型捐赠人。他们经常参观自己资助的公园，如果喷泉坏了或灯坏了，他们会迅速打电话告诉基金会负责人。 

“We really love Memorial Park. It’s a 3-mile trail. You see and hear every language,” Nancy Kinder says. “We just love to see people and dogs having fun. 

南希·金德说：“我们真的很喜欢纪念公园。它有一条3英里的步道，你可以听到和看到各种语言。我们只是喜欢看到人们和狗狗们开心地玩耍。” 

The couple have a well-developed process for determining what projects to fund. For starters, they have several community members on the board of their foundation, a balance that will change after they pass away. It will shift from having three nonfamily members on the board to an even balance of five family members and five community members. Foundation staff members work closely with community groups to help identify needs and interests. They will not invest in a park project unless there is an entity, like a conservancy, that is funded to maintain it — something they often contribute to as well. 

这对夫妇有一套完善的程序来决定资助哪些项目。一开始，他们的基金会董事会中有几位社区成员。未来在这对夫妇去世后，这一平衡将发生变化。董事会成员将从三名非家庭成员，变为五名家庭成员和五名社区成员的平衡。基金会工作人员与社区团体密切合作，帮助确定需求和兴趣。他们不会投资公园项目，除非有一个实体机构（如保护协会）能够获得资金来维护该项目，这也是他们经常为之捐款的内容。 

“We’re trying to have a foundation that both reflects the coming generations of the family, but also takes into account the people who are very familiar with Houston’s needs and with philanthropy,” Richard Kinder says. “We just think that’s a good balance to have.” 

理查德·金德说：“我们正努力建立一个基金会，这家基金会既能反映家族的未来几代人，又能兼顾那些非常了解休斯顿需求和慈善事业的人士。我们认为这是一个很好的平衡。” 

For all of the press that MacKenzie Scott’s giving has generated in recent years, it’s not clear that many other donors are taking note, says Johnston, the philanthropy adviser. It’s another reminder that philanthropy at the highest levels is not necessarily driven by trends that are in the press or discussed by fellow donors. Philanthropists do learn from each other, but once they are on their path, they often stick with it. 

尽管麦肯锡·斯科特的捐赠在近年来引起了广泛的媒体关注，但慈善顾问约翰斯顿表示，并不清楚是否有其他捐赠人也注意到了这一点。这再次提醒我们，最高层次的慈善事业，并不一定受媒体报道或捐赠人讨论的趋势所驱动。慈善家们确实会相互学习，但一旦他们选择了自己的道路，通常会坚持下去。 

“MacKenzie Scott’s giving has been such a dramatic example, received so much attention, and yet how many other donors have we heard about who are really at a big scale doing the same thing?” Johnston says. “That further underscores the personal nature of that approach. It is personally fulfilling, and it is creating a positive impact on the world. But it’s not the answer that others are necessarily arriving at.” 

约翰斯顿说：“麦肯锡·斯科特的捐赠是一个如此戏剧性的例子，受到了如此多的关注，但我们又听说过多少其他捐赠人在大规模上做着同样的事情？这进一步强调了这种做法的个人性质。它让人获得成就感，并且对世界产生积极影响。但这并不一定是其他人会得出的答案。” 

Of course, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Richard Kinder says the diversity of approaches is a core strength of philanthropy. “That’s the beauty of American philanthropy; you are giving free rein to pretty smart people doing creative things,” he says. “The fact that somebody else is interested in nothing but HIV or libraries or whatever. I think it’s up to each person.” 

当然，这并不一定是坏事。理查德·金德表示，方法的多样性是慈善事业的核心优势。他说：“你给了非常聪明的人充分的自由，让他们做创造性的事情。有人只对艾滋病或图书馆或其他什么感兴趣，这没问题。我认为每个人都有自己的选择。” 

And even when some of these donors take somewhat similar approaches, they may have entirely different reasons for it. 

即使其中一些捐赠人采取的方法有些相似，他们可能也有完全不同的理由。 

Thomas Golisano (No. 8) gave away $500 million last year. Almost $400 million of that went to 123 nonprofits in New York and Florida with no strings attached. About 90 of those gifts were between $1 million and $5 million, often to small groups that rarely get such gifts. Many were to groups that serve people with developmental, intellectual, and physical disabilities. The issue has great meaning to Golisano, whose son has a developmental disability. 

托马斯·戈里萨诺（排名第8）去年捐赠了5亿美元。其中，近4亿美元捐赠给了位于纽约和佛罗里达的123个非营利组织，这些捐赠没有任何附加条件。约90笔捐赠的金额在100万到500万美元之间，这些捐赠通常是给那些很少获得此类捐赠的小型团体。其中许多捐赠是给那些为有发育、智力和身体障碍的人群服务的组织。这个问题对戈里萨诺意义重大，因为他的儿子有发育障碍。 

While making such large unrestricted gifts appears to be right out of the Scott playbook, Golisano says that her strategy didn’t influence his approach. Instead, he says, large unrestricted gifts are most beneficial to the nonprofits he wants to support. 

虽然这种大额非限定捐赠似乎像是麦肯锡·斯科特的惯用手法，但戈利萨诺表示，斯科特的策略并没有影响他的做法。他说，实际上，大额非限定捐赠最有利于他想要支持的非营利组织。 

“It was extremely rewarding. A lot of these gifts will be transformative for them,” he says of the nonprofits. “They can use their imagination and creativity to improve services or lower costs — whatever they decide to use it for.” 

他说：“这非常值得。很多这些捐赠对这些非营利组织来说，将是具有变革性的。它们可以发挥想象力和创造力，改善服务或降低成本，无论他们决定如何使用这些捐赠。”

This year’s Philanthropy 50 included the largest number of gifts of a billion dollars or more — six — in the list’s 25-year history. In total, this year’s donors gave $16.2 billion — the 10th most in 25 years. But it’s clear that wealth accumulation among the country’s richest individuals is outpacing philanthropic giving. Today 180,000 ultra-high-net-worth Americans control nearly $21 trillion in assets, according to Wealth-X, an Altrata company. Johnston says that those people give away about 0.5 percent of their wealth every year. 

今年的慈善50强榜单上有6人捐赠了10亿美元或以上的善款，是该榜单25年历史上最多的。今年的捐赠人总共捐赠了162亿美元，是25年来捐赠额第10高。然而，显而易见的是，美国最富有个人的财富积累速度，超过了他们的慈善捐赠速度。根据Altrata公司的Wealth-X数据，目前有18万超高净值美国人，控制着近21万亿美元的资产。慈善顾问约翰斯顿表示，这些人每年大约捐赠他们财富的0.5%。 

Nineteen individuals, couples, or families on our list also appear on the Forbes 400 list. Those 19 donors have a combined net worth of $954 billion. Yet together they gave away $12.3 billion — only 1.3 percent of their combined wealth. 

我们榜单上的19位个人、夫妇或家庭也出现在《福布斯400富豪榜》上。这19位捐赠人的总净资产为9540亿美元。然而，他们合计捐赠了123亿美元，仅占其总财富的1.3%。 

One of the reasons so much money may be on the philanthropic sidelines is that as donors contemplate giving larger and larger sums, they aren’t sure how to proceed. They want to better understand the results of their giving, Johnston says, but that requires more engagement, and sometimes help from experts. 

如此多的资金没有被投入慈善事业的原因之一，是因为随着捐赠金额越来越大，捐赠人不确定该如何进行。约翰斯顿表示，捐赠人希望更好地了解他们捐赠的效果，但这需要更多的参与，有时还需要专家的帮助。 

“As the checks get larger, donors raise their own expectations about their ability to understand and track what’s happened to their giving, and that requires them to put some things in place that become a challenge, especially if they’ve become very wealthy but they haven’t actually created the time and space in their world for a significant amount of time to be spent on philanthropy,” he says. “I think that is a big reason why money sits on the sidelines.” 

约翰斯顿说：“随着捐赠金额的增加，捐赠人对自己了解和跟踪捐赠结果的期望也会提高，而这需要他们建立一些措施，这对于那些变得非常富有却没有为慈善事业腾出足够时间和空间的人来说，尤其具有挑战性。我认为这就是为什么资金常常处于‘旁观’状态的一个重要原因。” 

Support from these wealthy donors is more important than ever, as nonprofits struggle to survive financially and federal funding is being halted or cut. 

在非营利组织财政拮据、联邦资助被停止或削减的情况下，这些富有捐赠人的支持比以往任何时候都更加重要。 

Yang, the retired investment banker, says that given the uncertainty of federal support of scientific research, she needs to be even more involved with her philanthropy and the organizations she supports. She sits on scientific advisory boards of the programs she funds and makes sure to be an active member. 

这位退休投资银行家杨表示，鉴于联邦对科学研究支持的不确定性，她需要更加积极地参与自己的慈善事业和所支持的组织。她参加了自己资助项目的科学顾问委员会，并确保自己是其中的活跃成员。 

“Boots on the ground. That’s my approach,” Yang says. “It’s great to announce a big initiative. But the devil is in the details. My money should go as far as it can go.” 

杨说：“脚踏实地。这就是我的方法。宣布一项重大举措固然很好，但细节决定成败。我的钱应该用到最需要的地方。” 

For some donors, this is also a time for thoughtful planning, says Ellis-Smith, the philanthropic adviser. Many countries are in the midst of significant political changes that will require more long-term strategic thinking. That’s especially true when it comes to philanthropy’s relationship with the government, where it has traditionally been a catalyst to spark funding from the government and to bridge holes. 

慈善顾问埃利斯·史密斯说，对于一些捐赠人来说，现在也是进行深思熟虑规划的时候。许多国家正处于重大的政治变革之中，需要更长远的战略思考。尤其在慈善事业与政府的关系方面，这一点尤为重要，因为慈善事业历来起到激发政府资金和弥补漏洞的作用。 

“Philanthropy was meant to fund the gap left from government services,” she says. “But what if this funding gap that we always talk about becomes a canyon?” 

史密斯说：“慈善事业的本应该为政府服务留下的缺口提供资金。但是，如果我们一直在谈论的资金缺口变成了峡谷，怎么办？”