What MacKenzie Scott’s $461 Million Says About Donor Trust

Fundraisers spend a lot of time trying to make gifts more attractive to donors.  We name buildings. We create restricted funds. We develop detailed budgets and carefully describe exactly how every dollar will be spent.  Sometimes that is exactly what a donor wants.

But MacKenzie Scott continues to demonstrate another model of philanthropy: Give significant money to organizations you trust—and then let them do their jobs.

Between 2021 and 2025, Scott gave $461 million to 16 public education institutions in California, with an average gift of nearly $29 million. Most important, the gifts were unrestricted. The institutions decided how the money could create the greatest impact.

That is unusual at this scale.  And I think there is a lesson here for both donors and nonprofit leaders.  Unrestricted giving is ultimately an expression of confidence.

A donor who says, “I believe in your leadership, your mission and your judgment” is making a very different statement than a donor who says, “I will support you, but only if you spend the money exactly as I prescribe.”

That doesn’t mean nonprofits should stop offering restricted giving opportunities. Capital projects, scholarships, programs and endowments will always have an important place in philanthropy.  But organizations should also earn the right to ask donors for flexible support.

How?  By demonstrating strong leadership. By producing measurable results. By communicating clearly. By stewarding past gifts well. And by helping donors understand not just a particular project, but the organization’s larger strategy.

There is another side to this story, too.  Unrestricted does not mean unaccountable.

One California college that received a Scott gift later faced questions about whether some of those funds had been spent without proper board authorization. That is a reminder that donor trust places an even greater responsibility on boards and leadership to maintain strong financial oversight.

For fundraisers, the takeaway is fairly simple: The best donor relationships eventually move from selling projects to building trust.  When a donor understands the mission, believes in the leadership and sees evidence of impact, the conversation can become much bigger than, “Would you fund this particular thing?”

It can become: “I believe in what you are doing. Put this money where it can do the most good.”  That may be one of the strongest endorsements any nonprofit can receive.