ThinkAdvisor Recap: Two Seasoned Experts Share Top Ways Advisors Can Grow Their Practice – Q&A

Why should advisors treat philanthropy as more than a year-end, tax-driven conversation?

John Johnson: It’s your role as the advisor to lead the conversation—not just the math around giving, but the meaning. Too often we hear that advisors have approached this too late, or that it only comes up at year-end for tax reasons. But consider the baseline: 85% of affluent households donate annually, so at a minimum these conversations will surface in every year-end review. That financial and tax analysis is actually a perfect avenue to understand a client’s giving preferences—you can quickly identify their interests, values, and passions through even small annual contributions. We just can’t ignore them.

Steven DuBrava: We have seen an upward climb over the last few years in advisors being more versed in philanthropy. But the conversation still tends to come up only toward the end of the year. Our hope is to help advisors turn this into an ongoing, year-round conversation—because charitable giving is a profound expression of a client’s values, a critical part of their financial plan, and a vital dimension of legacy building.

Steve, you opened with a story about a prospect and his advisor. What happened?

DuBrava: I met with a philanthropist and his advisor to discuss creating a private foundation. I always start by asking the person to talk through his or her philanthropic aspirations—it tells me whether a foundation is even necessary and keeps the conversation aligned with their goals. This philanthropist had clearly put thought into it. He wanted a formal scholarship program run by his children—all of whom are educators, so who better to lead it? He wanted to conduct site visits to see how his dollars were deployed, use multi-year grant agreements where they made sense, and treat philanthropy as a second career after selling his business. Most importantly, he was legacy-driven: he wanted his children and grandchildren involved and saw the foundation as a way to keep the family together. He planned to fund it with $18 million from the business sale, plus annual contributions and a large gift from his estate.

To me, the scenario screamed private foundation—or at least exploring both a foundation and a donor-advised fund (DAF). But as we talked, the advisor took hold of the conversation and started talking the foundation down: too burdensome, too expensive, too many compliance concerns and tax returns, too much of the client’s time. Those are all things Foundation Source handles for our clients every day. Based on how that advisor was steering things, you can probably guess where the client landed. Through today’s discussion, you’ll see the many ways that conversation could have—and should have—gone differently.

What does the data reveal about the gap between what clients want and what advisors provide?

Johnson: The numbers are striking. 91% of HNW clients want philanthropy addressed early—they’re asking you to bring it up as soon as possible—yet only 47% are satisfied with the conversation they’re having with their advisor. That’s the client telling you there’s a communication gap between what they’re asking for and what they feel they’re receiving. In our own anonymous poll, about 35% of advisors rated themselves in the bottom two tiers for how proactively they engage clients on giving, and about 65% ranked themselves average or above. Either way, there’s clear room to grow.

The way I think about it, advisors at the lower end are simply presenting philanthropy at year-end—that’s the “math.” There’s a clear tax benefit, and it shows up on every year-end analysis, so that’s a fine starting point. But the “meaning” is what takes the relationship deeper. Whether a client’s gifts are a few thousand dollars or eight or nine figures, spend time on the “why”: Why this commitment to their alma mater? Why the same annual gift to certain organizations, and what does it mean to them?

What does values-driven planning look like in practice—and how does it reframe the cost conversation?

DuBrava: Over 80% of high-net-worth and ultra-high-net-worth clients expect to have values-driven conversations. What that really means is stepping away from tax savings and cost worries and asking what the client actually cares about: What motivates you to give? What problems do you want to help solve? What’s your why? Do you want your children involved? Is anonymity important? Is your focus your lifetime, or is it legacy-driven? The answers give you a set of focus areas and a giving structure that reflect who the client is—and they help you identify the right vehicle, whether that’s a donor-advised fund, a private foundation, or a charitable remainder or lead trust. Above all, values-driven work makes the client feel understood, and clients want to feel understood.

It also changes the meaning of cost. Just recently I was on a call where a private foundation was clearly the right fit, but when we got to fees, it was the client who said: “Isn’t this expensive? Shouldn’t we do a DAF instead?” Because this advisor always leads with values-driven planning, he changed the client’s mind in seconds. He simply reminded him of everything he’d said he wanted to accomplish and how much he planned to contribute over the next five and ten years. It all lined up with a private foundation. The client understood we were looking beyond the cost because the advisor was providing the value to get him where he wanted to go. Advisors who lead with values produce a clearer vision, stronger guidance, and happier clients.

What’s the risk to advisors who don’t lead the philanthropic conversation?

Johnson: Let me tell it through a story. A close friend of mine is the CEO of a prestigious school and handles its fundraising. A donor who gave a couple thousand dollars a year decided to make a one-time $1 million gift to upgrade the football field. My friend was thrilled—but when he went to break ground and contacted the donor’s financial advisory group, they were completely caught off guard. They’d been handling the small annual gifts and had no idea this major gift was coming. That communication gap created delays that could have gone a lot worse. Fortunately, the field was ready for the season—but the lesson is clear.

DuBrava: The running theme is that clients want to discuss philanthropy with their trusted advisors in a meaningful way, and many report that their advisor never goes deep enough. By neglecting that conversation, you leave the door open for a competitor to swoop in—and whoever runs the philanthropic conversation tends to end up coordinating the broader plan and, in turn, managing the assets. Think back to the prospect I described at the start: he clearly wasn’t getting values-based planning, and there was an opportunity for his advisor to become well-versed in philanthropy so that he could pick up on these clear markers. It wouldn’t surprise me if that advisor lost control of managing those assets—and, given there were children involved, the next generation’s assets too. A holistic, values-based approach is what everyone is looking for today.

Women and the next generation are reshaping philanthropy. How should advisors respond?

DuBrava: Think of MacKenzie Scott and Melinda Gates—female leaders inspiring others to give. The number of female billionaires hit a record 406 in 2025, up from 89 in 2010, and women will control an estimated $34 trillion in assets. Women increasingly drive family philanthropy, and they tend to be thoughtful and creative, focused on the impact of the gift and on growth. One idea to raise with them is growing philanthropic dollars without adding new funding. For example, a private foundation can make program-related investments, or PRIs—many people don’t realize foundations can do this. A foundation might lend a hospital $500,000 for a new wing at a modest rate, say 2.5% rate. In many cases, that counts as a grant toward the 5% distribution requirement and still returns capital to the foundation. Creative tools like that grow the corpus without new contributions.

The next generations—Millennials and Gen Z—are wired differently. Rather than writing a check and never knowing what the dollars do, they put the cause first: they learn, volunteer, share ideas with peers, and mobilize before they give, and they expect to do much of it digitally. With an estimated trillions of dollars transferring to the next generation for philanthropy, ask them directly what causes they care about and what drives them; ask what you should be reading to understand their passions; and keep building trust by showing you care about the impact they want to make.

How can philanthropy help advisors build multigenerational relationships—and reach future clients?

Johnson: Families who collaborate and build traditions around philanthropy tend to build better relationships—they spend more time together around decision-making, value-sharing, and volunteering. In the foundation space, senior generations often use governance structure to foster leadership among their children. The question we get constantly is how to involve the younger generation. One of my favorite examples: a family asks its young teens to report back on a subject area they care about, explain why, and identify an organization doing that work. That often leads to volunteering, and it teaches them to be both philanthropic and thoughtful. The reward is that the foundation then makes a gift to the organization the child chose.

For the advisor, that’s a wealth of opportunity. If you’re sitting in on a board meeting, it’s not just a chance to review financials or pitch services—it’s a chance to listen. Families talk about what they care about, especially when they disagree about a grant, and that’s where you learn about them. You can also work with the younger generation on what investing means and how the vehicle is performing relative to the market. By spending that time, you’re not only serving the wealth earners—you’re building relationships with their heirs who are your future client base.

How should a family choose the right charitable vehicle?

DuBrava: It really comes down to what they want to achieve philanthropically. If it’s grants to the local community or to 501(c)(3)s, that’s easily done through a donor-advised fund, and if there’s no advanced grantmaking involved, that’s probably the solution. But once a family raises legacy giving, international grantmaking, or scholarships, you need to dig deeper. International grantmaking may require advanced approval through equivalency determination or expenditure responsibility. A scholarship can be as simple as a gift to a school for that purpose—easily done through a DAF—but if the family wants to be hands-on, setting criteria and reviewing essays to pick a recipient, that requires advanced approval and points to a private foundation. Ask as many questions as you can to collect the data on what they want to do, and the right vehicle becomes clear.

Johnson: One important technical point advisors should know: a private foundation can move assets downstream into a donor-advised fund, but a DAF cannot move assets upstream into a private foundation. I had a client whose estate was about to settle, and the advisor wanted to open a foundation and move DAF money into it to consolidate—that directionality was the first flag. But the DAF had been the right call originally; the family was making small, tax-advantaged contributions and giving sporadically without spending much time on it. Because we’d already done the meaning work, we could use both vehicles holistically: anonymous giving through the DAF, and international giving, family volunteer trips, or even hiring a family member through the foundation. Good planning gave the client a complete philanthropic toolkit.

What if a family can’t decide on a mission statement?

Johnson: This comes up often, and there’s usually some confusion. Mission statements matter most for public charities—think of a local soup kitchen actively raising and deploying funds in the community for a specific goal. For a private foundation or a donor-advised fund, a mission statement is far less important to have at the outset, because those vehicles have more leeway in where they focus. So many clients come to us not knowing exactly what they want to do, and that’s okay. You can establish the foundation, set up governance, and figure out where to give over time. The vehicles are built to pivot: if the first generation cares about the environment, later generations can carry that forward as a legacy—or, since there are always new problems in the world, they can shift their focus. Don’t let the absence of a mission statement slow down an important decision; it can come later.

Where should advisors start?

Johnson: A doctor recently told me that when a patient starts a question with “When should I start…,” he cuts them off and says, “Now.” There’s really no bad time to bring up philanthropy either. You’ll be ahead of the curve if you simply start before tax season. Begin small: ask what problems your client wants to solve, where they’d spend their time if they had more of it, and how they feel about their personal legacy and their wealth’s legacy. And if you don’t feel comfortable with any of it, pull in a tax attorney, an estate attorney, or a charitable specialist to walk through the questions with you. Many firms have in-house charitable specialists; if yours doesn’t, that’s where a partner like Foundation Source can help.

The payoff is real: better client satisfaction, more loyalty and retention, and a way to differentiate yourself. Nearly half of clients feel they aren’t getting enough, and about a third of the advisors in our poll admitted they could be doing more. As a high school teacher of mine used to shout: “If it is to be, it is up to me.” That applies to both the client and the advisor—it’s up to the client to tell us what they want to achieve, and up to the advisor to guide them there.

This is a condensed, edited version of the conversation. Get full insights by watching the entire webinar.