Historicizing philanthropists as policy actors in a higher education policy and politics course

• In Event: We Did Not “Fall Out of a Coconut Tree”: Fostering Historical Thinking Within Higher Education Graduate Programs

Abstract

Critical philanthropy scholars have sought to make clear the potential dangers and vulnerabilities that occur when scholars, activists, and policy-makers become financially dependent on private philanthropic foundation, think tanks, and other non-profit funding agencies (e.g., McCambly, 2023; Tompkins-Stange, 2016). This tension has become increasingly relevant with the highly-publicized influence of right-wing funders (e.g., Heritage Foundation, Manhattan and Goldwater Institutes) in shaping both draft legislation and broader political platforms (i.e., Project 2025) opposing Critical Race Theory and broader diversity, equity, and inclusion work on campus (see, e.g., Kamola, 2024), but concern about the influence of private funders is not new, nor is it limited to the political right.
Attending to historical thinking makes clear that in times of social turmoil, foundations have taken particular interest in shaping institutional responses to activism and unrest (Francis, 2019; Rooks; 2007). Studying foundation philanthropy through a historical lens gives insight into how competing interests, political agendas, and even inter-personal squabbles have power to shape discourse at the local, state, and federal levels—and how we might strategically intervene to both critique and resist the influence of these “policy patrons” (Tompkins-Stange, 2016). Despite the power of this approach, however, these topics are rarely discussed in Higher Education and Student Affairs graduate preparation programs.

Theoretical Framework

This work is animated by McCambly’s (2023) critical philanthropy studies approach, which argues that students of the relationship between foundations and higher education must focus on four critical tasks: 1.) attending to racialized distributions of both resources and agency; 2.) examining taken-for-granted administrative burdens and their role in inequitable distribution; 3.) attending to the social networks and primary identities of grantmakers and grantees; and 4.) examining attempts at change as simultaneously progressive and/or regressive. In particular, this project is interested in historicizing McCambly’s third task by mapping the social network and professional relations that influenced Rockefeller Foundation’s first “racial equity” grant program during the Civil Rights Era—the Toward Equal Opportunity for All (EO) Program (predecessor of the federal TRIO and Upward Bound programs).

Pedagogical Method and Archival Materials

In this pedagogical exercise, students in a Higher Education Policy and Politics course were invited to engage the professional diaries of Leland DeVinney—the Program Director for the Rockefeller Foundation’s EO program from 1963-1971. These diaries have been digitized and made publicly available by the Rockefeller Archive Center’s DIMES project and contain a wealth of information about the pressures, requests, and relations between DeVinney and a wide range of interlocutors from the federal government, the Rockefeller family, higher education leaders, the NAACP, and other forces. Mapping these relations helps students to understand the ‘messiness’ of the grant-making process, as well as the fraught relationships between funders, institutional leaders, and government policy makers.

This exercise seeks to humanize the policy-making process and destabilize the notion of altruistic, ‘objective,’ or agenda-less policy-influence. A historical approach also advances both empathy and agency (Wineburg, 1999) by recognizing the importance of interpersonal relationships and the difficulties of navigating complex and competing pressures and agendas.

Author

• Ali Watts, Bowling Green State University