Photo by Alex Andrews on Pexels.com
Yue Ming1 , Laurie E. Paarlberg2
1Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 2Indiana University Indianapolis, USA
When we think about why some nonprofit organizations receive larger grants than others, we typically focus on factors like organizational size, track record, or leadership capacity. What we do not often consider is something much more fundamental: where these organizations are located—and more importantly, where their funders are located.
Consider how place shapes perceptions in everyday life. A job applicant listing an address in an affluent suburb might be viewed more favorably than one from a neighborhood associated with poverty or crime, regardless of their actual qualifications. The same dynamic may operate in philanthropy, where the location of a grantee could influence funding decisions in ways that have little to do with organizational merit.
This phenomenon, known as “place-based stigma,” refers to the negative perceptions and symbolic “taint” attributed to individuals and organizations based on the racial and class characteristics associated with their geographic location. Places stigmatized in this way are often labeled with terms like “the wrong side of town”—and these labels carry real consequences for those who live and work there.
Despite growing awareness of these dynamics in other sectors, the role of place-based stigma in philanthropic decision-making remains largely unexplored. To investigate whether similar geographic biases operate in grantmaking, we examined the funding patterns of U.S. community foundations.
Continue reading “Place-based Stigma and Community Foundation Grant Making”
NVSQ Blog 