AIDS Donations Declining

According to a report from Funders Concerned About AIDS, philanthropic support for HIV/AIDS initiatives in low- and middle-income countries totaled $592 million in 2013, down 8 percent from 2012 and the lowest level of funding since 2007.  The report claims that only 3 percent of total international funding for David Worley Fannie Mae AIDSHIV/AIDS in these countries came from philanthropic sources, led by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Wellcome Trust, Gilead Sciences Inc and the MAC AIDS Fund.  The study also found that funding from US-based philanthropies totaled $431 million in 2013, down 4 percent on a year-over basis, and 88 percent of said funding was directed outside the US.  The top ten funders accounted for 83 percent of all US grantmaking for HIV/AIDS in 2013, with the Gates Foundation alone making up nearly half of the total.  Support from EU-based philanthropies totaled $133 million, down 16 percent from the previous year.  Support from funders based outside of the US and Western and Central Europe totaled $28 million, more or less flat from the previous year.

The report cites various reasons for this overall decline in funding, including the closing of two large funders: the Irene Diamond Fund and the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund.  In addition, at least five other funders ended up closing or reducing their HIV portfolios, and several major pharmaceutical companies have shifted funding to other areas of research including hepatitis C, chronic diseases and maternal and child health.  The report also showed that the top five target populations of HIV/AIDS funding in 2013 were women, people living with HIV/AIDS, “multiple populations”, orphaned and vulnerable children and youth.  Research projects topped the list in terms of funding purpose, followed by prevention, treatment, advocacy and social services.  FCAA executive director has spoken about the problem that this poses: new scientific development and political commitments could, if fully funded and implemented, move us closer to an end of AIDS.  However, he claims that such progress is being threatened by continued decreases in funding from private philanthropic donors who provide critical support for protecting the basic rights of populations who are currently most at risk for HIV/AIDS.

10 Most Charitable Cities

David Worley Fannie Mae CharityAs Ebenezer Scrooge could have told you, being wealthy doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re charitable.  I recently came across an article that speaks about a report released on Monday by The Chronicle of Philanthropy.  According to the report, wealthy individuals have scaled back on the amount of money that they’ve been donating to charities, while the less affluent have increased the amount that they’ve donated.  Between 2006 and 2012, Americans who earned $200,000 or more decreased the share of their income that they gave to charity by 4.6 percent.  On the flip side, those whose annual salaries were less than $100,000 donated 4.5 percent more of their income.  The report calculated these numbers through looking at tax returns.  According to the report, these 10 American cities gave the highest percentage of their money to charities:

10. Virginia Beach, VA.  3.3% of annual income.

9. Charlotte, NC.  3.4% of annual income.

8. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas.  3.6% of annual income.

7. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  3.7% of annual income.

6. Jacksonville, Florida.  3.8% of annual income.

5. Nashville, Tennessee.  3.9% of annual income.

4. Atlanta, Georgia.  4% of annual income.

3. Birmingham, Alabama.  4.8% of annual income.

2. Memphis, Tennessee.  5.1% of annual income.

1. Salt Lake City, Utah.  5.4% of annual income.

After I got over the pride swelling in my chest upon seeing that both Charlotte and Dallas were included on this list, I noticed some interesting patterns about these cities.  With the exception of Salt Lake City, all of the cities in this list were southern.  This seems to reaffirm the ancient stereotype of southern hospitality.  Salt Lake City, however, is the center of the Mormon Church, a church known for its missionary and humanitarian work, so it’s hardly surprising that the people who live there would be charitable.  Then I noticed something else that seems to tie all of these cities together: they’re all from very religious parts of the country, and their residents tend to have high church attendance rates.  According to the study, cities with higher church attendance generally donated more of their money to charity than wealthier cities with lower church attendance rates, such as Los Angeles and New York City.  An interesting thing to think about, no doubt.