Non-governmental and non-profit funds, usually from a single source and administered by trustees for various social and cultural purposes, represent a vital feature of American postwar society Foundations control hundreds of billions of dollars in funds and administer grants of more than $2 billion annually to augment and shape programs in social welfare, universities, museums, health, education and other areas. The origins of these foundations can be found in religious or charitable trusts that have existed worldwide for millennia. They also participated in the early American nation, although few major trusts today antedate those established by turn-of-the-century robber barons.

Their enduring authority can be seen in new moguls of the information age: a $5 billion gift by Bill and Melinda Gates to their foundation in 2000 made it the largest in the US, with assets of over $21 billion. In 1999, there were roughly 50,000 active grant organizations of this type; the largest 10,000 controlled $304 billion (92.3 percent of total assets) and awarded $14.3 billion (90 percent).

In the classic pattern, rich corporations, people or families constitute independent foundations (the dominant structure) as a return to society or to enhance the family and corporate image. Some of the largest private American foundations thus bear names associated with big businesses like Ford, Rockefeller, Gates, Mellon, Packard, Hewlett, Lilly, and Pew. Apart from the Gates Foundation, the other largest foundations by assets include the Lilly Endowment ($11.5 billion), the Ford Foundation ($9.5 billion) and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation ($8.9 billion). Ford has been the largest grantor, at $400 million annually followed by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and Lilly; Gates and his wife distributed $16 billion in 1999, again setting new standards. This philanthropic route was also developed in the 1990s by George Soros, Ted Turner, Jim Clark of Netscape and others.

Other types of foundations, including many corporate foundations, rely on continuing donations rather than endowments. Operating foundations focus on special programs, while community foundations may draw from many sources to deal with the issues of a particular locality These non-profit enterprises facilitate the development of social, economic, political, artistic, scientific, medical and other projects. Some foundations are general in scope while others develop special initiatives—the Spencer Foundation in Education, the John and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation in peace, the Annenberg foundation in communication/education, etc. Education is a favorite field, directly and through institutions as well as funding academic research. Health, social and international issues are also prominent causes. Yet, foundations are not simply philanthropic. They also move the nation’s cultural and social policies. Foundations, in many ways, react to certain national issues, like global warming, civic journalism, campaign finance reforms and national cultural policies, while they are also forerunners, trying to support studies to provide certain knowledge about issues and shifting national policies. Conservative foundations like the Heritage Foundation, however, promote very different agendas.

Concerns about non-profit independence demand government regulation of boards and policies. Worries range from their relations to corporations and taxes to continuing concerns about the involvement of non-profit groups with political parties.

The US government has also used the independent foundation model to promote research and the arts. The National Science Foundation, for example, was established during the Cold War (1950) to promote intersecting interests of scientific and technological development, science education and defense. It focuses especially on physical sciences, life sciences and engineering. It has also funded social science work, occasionally amid controversies about the implications of government funding like the scandals that highlighted misuse of anthropological data during the Vietnam War.

In 1965, following President Kennedy’s stress on American Arts, Congress created the National Foundation for the Arts and Humanities as another para-foundational independent agency One section, the National Endowment for the Arts, has promoted creation of and access to art in America. Yet it has also proved a catalyst for conservatives attacking its support for controversial performance artists or those like Robert Mapplethorpe who challenged generalized norms of sexuality and religion.

While the NEA has an independent board and head, controls on funding allow censorship and punishment to creep in. Another wing, the National Endowment for the Humanities, funds research and projects in academic arenas and museums as well as outreach programs. It has also been criticized for supposed leftism as well as academic irrelevance of projects, although it remains a major resource for scholars in its summer and long-term grants. The NFAH also includes a foundation devoted to museum services.