#154 Donor-Advised Funds with Sybil & Fred Ackerman-Munson
Nov 13, 2023
Sybil and Fred explore the fundamental characteristics of Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs). They examine the pros and cons of DAFs and discuss potential resolutions for common concerns about DAFs.
Episode Highlights:
- Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs) defined
- Critiques of DAFs
- Resolutions for concerns about DAFs
Sybil Ackerman-Munson Bio:
With over 20 years of experience as a nonprofit professional and foundation advisor, I work with philanthropic institutions and foundations interested in successful, high-impact grantmaking so that you can make a real and lasting positive contribution to the world on your terms.
Links:
- Ineqalitiy.org website: Inequality.org
- IRA DAF explanation: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/donor_advised_explanation_073108.pdf
If you enjoyed this episode, listen to these as well:
https://www.doyourgood.com/blog/152-Whats-the-Big-Deal-About-Donor-Advised-Funds
https://www.doyourgood.com/blog/151-The-Ins-and-Outs-of-Donor-Advised-Funds-with-Andrea-Rush
Crack the Code: Sybil’s Successful Guide to Philanthropy
Become even better at what you do as Sybil teaches you the strategies and tools you’ll need to avoid mistakes and make a career out of philanthropy.
Sybil offers resources including free mini-course videos, templates, checklists, and words of advice summarized in easy to review pdfs.
Check out Sybil’s website with all the latest opportunities to learn from Sybil at www.doyourgood.com
Connect with Do Your Good
Would you like to talk with Sybil directly?
Send in your inquiries through her website https://www.doyourgood.com/ or you can email her directly at [email protected].
FULL TRANSCRIPT:
Sybil
Oh my gosh, should we keep that on our podcast? That was funny. I think your stomach is ready for the interview.
Fred
I don't think…I did not have breakfast. Honey, this is like our first-morning podcast. I think we've ever done.
Sybil
Right. But you did have your coffee, right?
Fred
OK, I've had coffee. Yes.
Sybil
For folks who don't know us that well yet, I'm the person who's the morning person, so I. Wake up. I don't know, 6:00 in the morning. Totally like, come on, honey, let's go. And I'm talking to you about it. And then you always have to remind me of that. You haven't had your coffee.
Fred
I've had coffee, so I'm ready to go.
Sybil
Yay, but I don't know if anyone could hear Fred's stomach rumbling, but that's what was right at the beginning of the podcast, just on cue… Love it. Anyway, we might edit this out, but we also might not. Let's see. OK, well, so for folks who want to hear about something real,
Fred
Oh, my God.
Sybil
Today, we're going to talk about donor-advised funds and me.
Fred
Well, I'm excited to talk to you today about that as well.
Sybil
Yeah. And our listeners might say: Oh my gosh, you guys are so dorky because we are right. Like DAFs, really.
Sybil
Your honor.
Sybil
No, not really.
Fred
Right. No, not at all. It's a huge amount of money going into DAFs.
Sybil
I know. And they're it. They're on the Rise. This past year, the share of annual giving to DAFs is 22%. This number has netted more dollars than private family foundations in the United States for the first time.
And so, it's sort of buzzing in our world because the fact is that donor-advised funds have different rules. They're not quite as transparent as private family foundations. And so, why are people putting more money into donor-advised funds? And what are the benefits of daffodils? And there are pluses and minuses there.
I interviewed way more people than I thought I would interview about the rise of DAFs. Some folks are more critical, some folks. Who aren't? So, anyone listening to this, please, please, please listen to all the experts from this past month because those interviews were really fun.
So, before you and I get into It. Let me just remind everyone what the definition of a donor advisory fund is, and then I want to talk about it more. So, this definition came from the National Philanthropic Trust. But you can also look at the IRS. They have a similar definition. The Internal Revenue Service—excuse me, no acronyms on this podcast.
Fred
I think people know. Who the IRS is.
Sybil
If you're in the United States, you are. OK, the DAF is a giving account established at a public charity. It allows donors to make a charitable contribution, receive an immediate (that is important) immediate tax deduction, and then recommend grants from the fund over time. That's also really important.
Donors can contribute to the fund as frequently as they like and then recommend grants to their favorite charitable organization whenever possible. OK, we'll have the link to that definition and the Internal Revenue Service definition in the show notes. But those are some of the real benefits and why people like to open a DAC. They also might like to do it because there are transparency requirements with private family foundations. There are a lot of other legal requirements.
And so if you start it from scratch, it can be daunting, especially if you don't have tons and tons of money to give away, but you want to give away some money.
So we'll discuss all the benefits and the costs in a minute, but let me hear more from you. Honey. What? What do you think about donor-assisted funds and this rise in gaffs? Like, what do you do? What are yours? What's your perspective on this?
Fred
Well, I've got two conflicting perspectives. So, one is that there are criticisms of donor-advised funds that involve the wealthy getting tax deductions and the money not going out to work in the community. We should get into those, but the foundation I work for has used daffodils, and my private family foundation has used daffodils.
Sybil
The Private Family Foundation
Fred
Particularly to work… To do work in Canada with First Nations because it has given us a safe place to put money that we can then put out the door when the First Nation is ready, a private family foundation has to get a certain amount of money out the door every year by IRS regulations, 5% of their…
Sybil
Right.
Fred
Average monthly fair market value? Who?
Sybil
We are getting into cool stuff now.
Fred
Yeah, that's geeky. But anyway. Family foundations and private foundations have to get money out the door every year. With the Daff, you can park the amount until your grantee is ready. So I have these two conflicting things.
Sybil
Yeah, yeah, I do too. I'm very conflicted.
Fred
They are worried about the sort of capitalism part of the deaths where it gives the appearance that people are just hiding their money. And then I also, from a professional perspective, saw the utility.
Sybil
Yeah. Right. I have that same conflict because I work with people with family foundations, who then pool money in donor-advised funds for similar reasons to what you're talking about. Donor Advised Funds can bring you closer to the community, and it's really important, the donor advised. It can create a buffer between the wealth and the community.
So, one example I have is possibly additive. What are you talking about? A few US funders wanted to fund local communities along the Oregon coast. There are a lot of wonderful smaller nonprofits, and one of my colleagues who's with the foundation, that's very, very large. If they had just sort of put lots and lots of money directly every year into the community without some kind of buffer, it could have caused negative consequences for that community instead.
We pooled funds through a donor-advised fund at the Oregon Community Foundation. Through the Oregon Community Foundation, which has much deeper roots in the community. We also contracted a local on the coast to advise us on good grant-making strategies. Then that person also organized tours for us. So, we would go with this person and meet with the local grantees. And also potential future grantees.
The benefit of having the donor advisory fund is that it allowed us to have, I feel, a more genuine and strong connection to the community that I wanted to serve. Because it diffused that power dynamic quite a bit. So, I think that's what you're saying, too, that there can be useful components of donor-advised funds, right?
Fred
Sure. Definitely. Let's get into the criticism. First, I think so that people know why we're even talking about this.
Sybil
Yeah. Yeah, please.
Sybil
Totally. And I interviewed Helen Flannery…
Sybil
I wrote up a really
Sybil
It is a good blog and has raised many concerns, and we had a great discussion about this, too. So folks should listen. That interview, too, right? And.
Fred
She was with …
Sybil
Fred
yeah, so. I think it's important to just step back for a second and say that some of the criticisms of donor-advised funds revolve around things like transparency and that there is no minimum payout required, and we'll get into that in a second. But taking a step back further, inequality.org has real problems with people amassing wealth generally in our capitalist system.
So, for them, donor-assisted funds are just another symptom of that larger problem. And so, I think it's worth separating that out.
Sybil
Right.
Fred
Whether we have donor-advised funds or not, I don't think that will solve the issues with how the United States practices capitalism. The kinds of things that our kids remind us about every day—why we don't have social safety nets—and that's why we have houseless people, all of that stuff. I don't think donor-advised funds will solve that problem one way or another, but they make some good points. As I mentioned earlier, with a private family foundation, we are legally required to give away 5% of our assets every year.
Sybil
And when you say “our” because you run a private family foundation, right?
Fred
Yeah, not you and me. We don't. We don't have a private family foundation, but the one I do work for that. I'm the executive director for all private foundations. Another thing is that all of our grants must be reported on our tax form, and you have to have transparency. At least some, anyway. None of that exists for a donor-advised fund, technically.
Sybil
Right.
Fred
That money could go into a donor-advised fund and sit there forever. Even though you've gotten the tax deduction, right? So.
Sybil
That's a serious good, of course.
Fred
Those are Legitimate criticisms of donor-advised funds. The thing is, I think they're solutions.
Sybil
Those are right, right?
Fred
Do you want to talk about those for a second?
Sybil
No, you talk to me.
Sybil
Go ahead.
Fred
OK, First, I feel reasonable people could get together and figure it out. Some specifics, like they have for private foundations about a reasonable payout per year or over five years or over ten years. It's a doable thing. You could solve that problem through legislation and say, OK, all donor-advised funds, you need to have a payout amount.
Maybe it's less strict than family foundations, but you can create a monthly payout amount similar to the idea that the money will be inactive forever. You can have a piece of legislation that just says that at least every ten years, money has got to come out of your fund. This means this is solvable.
Sybil
Well, there are examples. I mean, for example, the Oregon Community Foundation, where we're at where we have our donor-advised fund, you and me.
Fred
Which is very tiny for the record.
Sybil
Yes, but we're slowly building, another reason we have a donor advised.
Fred
Yes, we're putting money in every month.
Sybil
For that reason, we don't have a ton of money right now, and we're building buildings so that when we finally give money out, it'll be more substantial and meaningful in our minds than smaller amounts.
And now for an ad. But don't go away because there's so much more to discuss.
But I wanted to say that the Oregon Community Foundation has a requirement that we have our donor-advised fund. Once we pass, once we die, it'll go to our kids.
But then, after that, the money goes into the general People you can't donate to advise that donor-advised funds can't stay in perpetuity. It's not there forever. It's there for us and our kids. And then, after that, the money goes into the general pooled fund of the Oregon Community Foundation. And then the Oregon Community Foundation does grants. They do initiatives, and they use that money for a lot of things for Oregon.
And so that's why we put it in a daft too: because Oregon has given us so much, the state of Oregon, and we love it. I have no idea in 5–6 generations what people will need here. Still, it's more likely that the Oregon Community Foundation will be around than any other institution thinking about the community and its needs. And so that's why we're doing that, right?
And so, the Money goes into the general fund, and then the board is deciding on grants around initiatives, like right now, they did have a program on dental care. They had a fund where they worked on wildfire response. A few different people created them for a few different reasons. Everything is more complicated than simple. But that's the whole thing—you're investing in that community.
Fred
They have a board of community members with particular expertise in different areas and can make judgments.
Sybil
So, I'm trying to say that this is a model; so many models out there can push back on the idea that you just park money, get a donation, and never actually give it to charity. And I don't have what I couldn't find in my research, and I'm sure it's out there.
So, I want to ask anyone listening to this if they have this. Information e-mails me about. What I haven't been able to find is how much of this money. That's going into donor-assisted funds parked for more than 10/15/20. Thirty years are never spent and versus how much of it does go back out within five, 10–15 years, and some research has been done around this, but I would love, but I haven't been able to find a comprehensive piece of work on this, and it's probably honestly because we don't have that data. But that's the kind of reform that would be nice if we don't have a way to get that information, then we should be able to get that information.
So there are lots of great ways. I love what you're talking about great reforms that wouldn't mean donor-assisted funds would be eliminated, but rather since they're on the rise, how do we figure out what's happening?
Fred
Yeah, and. Well, they would still be useful for the things that people need them for. If people come into wealth suddenly and don't know what they want to do with it and don't want to waste it, they put it in a donor advice fund, which gives them some time to develop a giving program.
Sybil
Yeah, that's another good reason for you.
Fred
And, importantly, they don't have to do all of the work that's associated with ginning up a private foundation for it
Sybil
That costs a lot of money, too.
Fred
It costs money, and it's also, yeah. And it would be best if you had lawyers. And yet, there's all this compliance stuff. It's a big deal.
Sybil
But there are also benefits to private family foundations, right?
Fred
Oh, yeah, don't get me wrong, they're great. I work for one. You work.
Sybil
Yeah, like we did, yeah.
Fred
For one, so
Sybil
There's a benefit there. We're not doing a podcast on the benefits of private family foundations, but there are. There are benefits there, too.
Fred
I'm just saying there's usefulness to the donor-advised fund model, and I wouldn't want to lose that because I want people to give money as much as they can if this is the way that works for them.
Sybil
That flexibility.
Sybil
I think that's great, and the other thing I worry about is if there's too much push. Back then, people just didn't have to give money away; they could just decide whether it was worth it. So we don't want to do that either.
Fred
So yeah, I Have one other thought. Just so donor advice, funds are a little bit of a hot topic in the philanthropic world. At the same time, there are many younger, wealthy people, especially in tech. They aren't doing either of those things. They're not creating foundations, and they're not creating donor-advised funds. They're doing different things that give them even more flexibility and control and allow them to get a tax deduction. Still, it also allows them much more flexibility, and they can get into politics.
Sybil
Right.
Fred
So I think it's I think it's just worth noting that this is not the only new giving method.
Sybil
Right, exactly, exactly. And there are a lot of giving methods that don't get the tax deduction. And so, it is… I mean, this is something you and I often talk about. It's really like a tax conversation more than anything, right? It's what you can do where you get a tax benefit. Because Congress and our decision-makers said, well, what you're doing, we’re helping society in a way that we also would like to help society, but we can't. Use tax dollars for everything, and we want you to be able to help us.
So, since you're helping the houseless and since you're also giving donations to charities that are helping education, education, and the environment, you're doing all these things that we can't possibly do everything.
So, we won't tax you because you're doing what we also want to do. So that's the whole thing. Idea. But if you're trying to like Lobby, yes, or if you're trying to elect us to office, we're not going to give you a tax. Deduction because that's Not filling in for services, we might not be able to do, but we Want to do it? Otherwise, so that's, and so that's why, like, fundamentally, people do worry a little bit. Our donor-advised funds are private family foundations—just a shadow government trying to take over, rather than just simply trying to help people in ways that maybe the public dollar can't help people, and these are really important questions that don't advise funds daffs get us to think about. Sorry, Hun, go.
Fred
Well, it goes back to the history of private philanthropy with the Rockefellers and JP Morgan. They were doing philanthropy. However, Congress was worried they could have so much influence over everything that was done because they had so much money.
Sybil
Right.
Fred
And they're like, OK, we'll give you a tax deduction, but only if you're not, as you said, doing things like lobbying, trying to elect politicians, et cetera. We're seeing from the critics of donor-advised funds that they're saying the same basic thing people said back in the early days of Rockefeller and JP Morgan, and all of that was. Hey, you can't just sock your money away tax-free and then not do anything with it. There needs to be transparency, and there needs to be some, and the money needs to go out the door.
Sybil
No, no. I need to push back, though. OK? What was going on… because I was a geek and read the legislative history.
Fred
Oh geez, there's always pushback for everyone.
Sybil
In law school.
Yeah, but I mean, the real worry wasn't necessarily that the wealthy folks like Rockefeller would stock money away and not do anything with it. I think the worry was that they would. Put money tax-free and with a benefit, and then create a shadow government and do something with it. Right. And now what we're talking about is the concern, and that's why there's all this transparency around private family foundations and many rules.
We ensure that even if The Private Family Foundation gives to a nonprofit, they're not what you call tipping the charity, so they do not have too much control over the charity's decisions, all this stuff there. And I think that's the concern: donor-advised funds because they have fewer of those sideboards. Not only can the wealthy person just suck money away, but they can also influence things and do other stuff without a whole lot of transparency too.
So it's just this like there's another, another Avenue that people are trying to approach, and good questions are being asked: is this something that? It should have a little bit more transparency. Should there be more sideboards? I think that we should have this conversation. I also think we should be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater because that has some great benefits. A private family foundation doesn't always have access to it, and we want to be sure we keep those to.
Fred
Sure—one other criticism about DAFs, as they are on the rise now, is that many of the largest providers of donor-advised funds are wealth management firms. You are fit by ladies in Charles Schwab, and there's a concern that they're just.
Sybil
Yes. Yeah.
Fred
They are giving people a tax haven and facilitating making their own companies' money, yeah. And so, I don't know enough about that to say whether that's true, but I worry about it. Are people just being told to do this because it's a tax deduction, and they're not even thinking about what they want to do with the money? I don't know that that's true, but the fact that those money management firms have now taken the lead in where people park their money does give it a not-so-good look.
Sybil
Well, I mean. So it is; I have a couple of thoughts about that. I think it's great that these investment firms and banks are also encouraging charitable investment.
So, they see a benefit in what the banks do, and the investment companies see a benefit in talking to their clients about putting money away for charitable purposes. If they didn't see that benefit, they wouldn't even discuss it with their clients, which would be worse. Again, it's about sideboards and encouraging and supporting the charity as the next step.
I had a really interesting meeting. It was like 8 or 9 years ago with one of my clients. And I love that this is one family foundation. I just love them, and they always invite me to all these random meetings. And there was one meeting where their bank tried pushing them to open a DAF. Essentially, they fold and end their private family foundation and run it through the bank.
And so, they invited me to the meeting. I'm working for the foundation as an expert, specifically on environment and natural resources work, right? So, they brought me in, and I could tell that the bank leads and the people trying to convince them were nervous about me being there because they were saying come and start this arm, this charitable arm of your work. We have experts in the field you care about. We can help you by scanning the nonprofits.
And I started asking some questions. I was softballing it because I wanted to be careful in this meeting. But, like I, I know a lot. I know a lot about environmental grant-making, and I know a lot about what the family wants to give in that area, so I was just asking them some softball questions about the environment. They didn't know the answers. They said we could do a scan, essentially web research. We always laugh about Web research. If all you're doing is looking at web research, you don't know what's happening in your field. Like, that's just not.
So that's the kind of thing that worries me.
And now for an ad. But don't go away because there's so much more to discuss.
But on the other side, it's great that these institutions have charitable arms and are genuinely thinking about it. And I'm sure my one little experience in that meeting is not accurate everywhere. I'm sure that I did recent research on Vanguard and Fidelity, especially when I was looking. They have significant programs for charitable giving, and they have people who know what they're doing In those areas; anyway, I just think it isn't very easy here. I don't think it's as simple, and you're not saying this either. It's not as simple as that. Oh, if Fidelity has something, it must not be good. But I see what you mean. The outward look isn't so good. People can say, " Wait, these are investment firms trying to do charitable giving. That's not what they're set up for. They're set up to make money. Like, how is this working?
Fred
Yeah, even with the foundation I work for, we employ money managers to invest our endowment, and they get a percentage. Approximately 1%. So, it's not like people aren't making money off investments in any of the scenarios we're discussing.
Sybil
Exactly. Private family foundations, too.
Fred
Right. So, like you said, it's complicated, but it is also not a good look. And if you are the thing I worry about,
Sybil
specifically into having banks and investment firms lead charitable giving. That doesn't. It's sort of like saying, I'm sorry, but I have to say this, I just think.
Fred
Be the leaders. And right.
Sybil
You and I don't invest people's money. So, wealthy individuals who have private family foundations or want expert advice on giving money to amazing nonprofits hire us because we have a history in the nonprofit sector. We know the issues. We know our nonprofit colleagues; we were in the nonprofit world. So you hired us to do that? You wouldn't hire us to invest in you. Money. But what's happening? I know, but
Sybil
Oh, that's for sure.
Sybil
What's happening is that folks who invest money are being hired to give money away, and that's the tricky part. Thing, right, right.
Fred
Right and.
Sybil
Again, I'm not against it necessarily. If they hire the right people,
Sybil
Oh yeah.
Sybil
Know how to.
Sybil
Do this stuff, but
Fred
Right. I think that's what we're kind of settling on here: there are some easy solutions to the criticisms about donor-advised funds. They can have more transparency and create some sort of payout.
Sybil
These are some reforms to address that.
Fred
Yeah, they could create some sort of requirement for inactive funds that you can't have a DAF that's inactive for ten years or whatever.
There are plenty of ways to solve these problems. If I were Fidelity or Vanguard or any of those folks, I would want to be trumpeting the expertise we've hired to give away our funds smartly and advise you on giving that money away. If it just looks like they're doing it to make money, that's happening to be a bad look.
Sybil
Well, here's the thing, Hun. Again, I want to be careful because I don't know all these pieces. But like you and me, we go to Conferences and funder conferences with experts trying to really, genuinely think through how-to do-good giving strategies on a whole host of issues. I don't think so, and I've been doing this for how many years? 13.
Not once at any one of these conferences did, we think hard about how to give money away effectively to other like-minded donors. Have I met anyone from Fidelity, Vanguard, or any places where they don't have staff that show up at these meetings?
OK, so it might be that they're going to. Other meetings talked about the same issue. Maybe that's the case. It could be, but that's a problem because if they're not genuinely investing in staff, we're going to conferences and the main conferences on the issues we work on. I don't think there's another parallel conference on developing strategies around some of these issues.
Fred
Around biodiversity protection? No there is not.
Sybil
So that's what I'm trying to say. I am a little worried that that would be my concern, like an addition; an additional piece of it is where the experts and the other thing I'm Thinking about is I was talking to somebody just a couple of weeks ago. They told me how they're creating online courses and other things to support people who want to get into our profession.
OK, so they want to support people who want to support high-net-worth individuals to give money away effectively, right? They were telling me about a program that certifies people to be philanthropic advisors. And I had never heard about this program, so I looked at it online. And I'm like, interesting. I mean, there's a whole program you can sign up for. You can become a philanthropic advisor and be certified. And I was talking to This gentleman about how I'm like nobody. I know who's an expert philanthropic advisor and who's successful. Nobody I know has any of these certifications. It is irrelevant. No one asks me if I have those certifications.
Why would someone want to invest in getting a certification? And this person told me, oh, it's the banks, the investment firms, and the larger institutions that look at these certifications. I'm not saying that's a bad or good thing, but that it's interesting.
And when I was looking at what those certifications are, it's much more about the process, and those are all important. I teach the process, right? But when you go to the next level, how do You give money away with empathy, with effect, and by really understanding the nonprofits you're serving, making sure that you're not giving money away in a way that ends up causing more problems and more tension between nonprofits? All of those things—that's not necessarily where these folks are coming from yet. I'm not saying they're doing anything bad or purposeful. It's just that there's this disconnects.
So that's another thing we would want to consider as daffs are on the rise: how do we unite with some of these larger institutions with Fidelities and others? How do we work with their staff? How do we invite them in? We also may not be inviting them enough into these circles. Maybe they don't even know that these amazing groups we are working with help ensure we're giving. Away money well. Maybe we don't even know we exist, right?
Anyway, I went on my soapbox for a minute, but it hit me while we talked. This is why I like having these conversations.
Fred
Yeah, no, that is super interesting. I never really thought about that. We've had experience in some of our local groups, like those based in Washington State, for instance, don't funder groups where there has been occasional. A corporate foundation representative, a good friend of ours, was there for Boeing, and they were quite engaged. Yeah, they were quite engaged, and so it's.
Sybil
Oh yeah, yeah. Oh yeah, we worked with It was great. They were really good. Patagonia, REI. I mean corporate folks with a lot of, we've partnered a lot keen.
Fred
Yeah. Well, right, though, right?
Sybil
We've partnered with many different Staff at those organizations that genuinely want to give. Well, yeah.
Fred
What's interesting about it? If so, this is a little in the weeds, but Keene is in the eye if you think about corporations like Patagonia.
Sybil
Yeah, it's a different structure. It doesn't adapt; they don't.
Fred
Right, right. They have their corporate foundations. I think it's fair to say that they are on the progressive side of the political equation, and there's something that, in the past, I think the environment was more of a progressive issue. It's become a lot more mainstream now, and so.
Sybil
When you say the environment, you mean the issue environment, not generally the ambient environment.
Fred
Yes, well. Right. But I'm just saying a lot more people are concerned about the environment, and it's more of a mainstream issue. And so, there is, I guess, all I'm saying, love, is like you hit on something there. There's a real opportunity to start working with some of them.
Sybil
Yeah, right. It's affecting.
Fred
On what is viewed as a mainstream and important environmental issue that might be worth pursuing in your spare time.
Sybil
OK.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I think having a larger conversation about this with even more folks would be really good. I like that.
Fred
Maybe a future podcast would have representatives from Schwab and Fidelity and stuff on and saying, hey, how do you guys advise your clients? Done with the environment, and maybe try to do it in a way where we're trying to create something.
Sybil
Yeah, I might. I might. Maybe I could go and send them a yeah, I could send them an invite and a question, I mean.
Sybil
Little bit.
Fred
It's an idea, anyway.
Sybil
I'd love to. Ask them that and sort of see where they'd want to go. I hope they won't consider it a challenge like that. I don't. I'm not. I never approach anything like a gotcha, right? So, I wouldn't want them to feel that way. Yeah, I want them to be like that.
Fred
Oh no, that's. Not what. I'm not; I'm thinking about it like creating something, creating bridges between.
Sybil
I'm sure they want to create those bridges, too. I don't. I just don't. I don't know about this.
Fred
They may not and probably don't even know our world exists.
Sybil
Well, I wouldn't say that. I'm sure that they know, but they might not have the Oh, actually, good point. Maybe they don't. That's what I was saying before. Maybe they don't know that we have all these meetings. Maybe we haven't reached out. It's on. We like us. Haven't you reached out so right like that? Yes, that's the next step. I love this so much. Listen, there is.
That does it.
You guys, everybody listening?
Fred
Does the Environmental Grant Makers Association
Sybil
Do we? Well, I bet you they are.
Fred
Invite those people. Right. I don't know. Yeah.
Sybil
Do, but who knows? We can't assume; we haven't asked a question. Right? OK. This is our project. So, anyone listening to us, I wanted the Fred and Sybil conversations because you all know what we discussed over dinner. We try to work through things like this, then plan the next steps, and it's really fun. It's one of the reasons I love you so much, honey.
Fred
Oh, I love you too. No, you woke me early in the morning to do this podcast.
Sybil
I know we'll have to go. Well, the reason is Hun that we have to go to Bellevue because.
Fred
I work there.
Sybil
You work there, and…
Fred
We're going to see Peter Gabriel tomorrow.
Sybil
So that's going to be fun, and that's why it's not so bad. It's the smallest fiddle ever. Alright, well, I love you, honey. I'll. I'll talk. Well, I can't wait for the next one.
Fred
I stand corrected. Yeah, I love you too.