Why Do Some Donors Choose To Give Anonymously?
This feature will appear in Intercom, the Faculty/Staff Newspaper, March 26, 1998
By Lisa M. Rosellini, Public Information.

3-25-98
University Park, Pa. -- Giving credit where credit is due. A simple, honorable notion - in fact, an idea highly touted by most management manuals. It's a no-brainer. Acknowledging someone's performance, their thoughtfulness or their generosity comes naturally to those of us trained as children about the magic found in the words "please" and "thank you."

But what about people who desire no recognition but deserve considerable kudos?

On March 25, Penn State Erie received a $20 million gift that will have a serious impact on academic life at that location. The money, which will go toward scholarships, fellowships, the library, outreach efforts, faculty initiatives and endowing faculty positions, is the single largest gift ever received by an institution in that part of the state and the second largest gift to date in Penn State's current capital campaign. And it came with a request for anonymity - a peculiar twist to those not familiar with the philanthropic world.

"The motivations behind anonymous giving are as varied and diverse as the people who give," said Rodney Kirsch, vice president for development and alumni relations for Penn State. "The very act of philanthropy, particularly major commitments, is a deeply personal matter and the University takes seriously its responsibility to honor donor wishes.

"There are not just one or two reasons you can point to as a driving force behind anonymous giving," he said. "Changing circumstances allow donors to change their minds and identify themselves."

Karen Mack, a publicist for the Campaign for the University of California, Los Angeles, said her institution has had a number of anonymous gifts over the last several years. For the most part, according to Mack, donors wish to go unnamed because of issues of family security or because they don't want to be "pestered."

"We have one donor in particular who almost always gives anonymously," she said. "In our initial campaign he gave $5 million and recently gave more than $20 million. He keeps a low profile and likes it that way."

In 1996, UCLA received a gift of $45 million that, at the time, was considered anonymous. Nothing was revealed about the donors, but the money was going toward the construction of a neuroscience and genetics research building. Still the largest gift to date ever received by UCLA, the building now bears the name of the givers.

"We kept their names out of the press. These donors are Holocaust survivors who actually have two last names, because they changed it when they escaped to this country," she said. "The donors asked us not to reveal any information about them at that time and we did not."

Anonymous donors, particularly those that give sizable contributions, pique the interest of the public, according to Rita Shell, assistant professor of behavioral science at Penn State Harrisburg, because not only does the nameless individual lend an air of mystery to a gift that very few could match, but humans are curious and welcome a challenge.

"It's really a personality type," Shell said. "Some people are outgoing and enjoy the attention. Others might want to be altruistic, but shy away from the spotlight. Obviously this person does not want to have attention focused upon them, but they want to do something nice."

In some cases, Shell said, people may just prefer the intrinsic satisfaction or internal feelings of knowing that they have done something good. The idea of "doing something good" is what prompted an unnamed donor to recently give $30 million to the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn. The gift is believed to be the largest given anonymously to any college or university in the United States this year. "This was the largest gift ever in our 110-year history," said Richard Weiland, executive director of development for the University of St. Thomas. "In this particular case, the donor wanted to have a tremendous impact at this institution, but didn't want to be plagued by calls from others seeking money."

"They wanted to give, but didn't want their vision clogged. The main thing that they sacrifice is the direct thanks from students. But they can still see the wonders and glories of their gifts as they watch faculty or students benefiting from the programs they have endowed."

In other instances, Weiland said many givers really do believe that giving is a personal matter, and it's best to "keep this candle under the basket." "In my 20-plus years of experience in development I have found that some givers maintain the notion that giving secretly or privately is how giving should be done," he said. "They are driven from a more sacred or spiritual reason. The gifts can be $30 million or they can be $1,000 - they are all important gifts. We prefer to thank our donors publicly, but our 11th commandment here is 'honor the wishes of the donor.' If they prefer to be anonymous, so be it."

Weiland said that those who donate are all moved to give for different reasons and, like Shell, he acknowledged that anonymous giving at this level does lend itself to speculation by outsiders and the media.

"Reporters do play a lot of guessing games, which could draw more attention to the gift and have it become a motivational factor for others in the community," he said. "In our case, the media was highly curious but I think that from a distance our donor is chortling, knowing that he or she has pulled this off and has really made a difference."

Penn State's Kirsch added that donors, whether anonymous or public, undertake the act of giving because they want their gifts to have an impact - to positively change lives.

"I find anonymous donors, perhaps while intriguing or mysterious to some, to be every bit as committed to the cause they support as donors who publicly announce their intentions. And that is really the bottom line.

**lmr**