The potential ethical and economic pitfalls of philanthropic donations to museums have been thrown into the spotlight by protests against museums’ ties with prominent donors.
Last month, there were anti-drugs protests at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art over its links with the Sackler family, after whom a wing is named. Brothers Arthur, Mortimer and Raymond Sackler donated $3.5m for the construction of a wing of the museum in the 1970s. The family is behind the company that makes OxyContin, a widely prescribed and abused painkiller. The Sacklers have also donated funds to London’s Serpentine Gallery and the Royal Academy of Arts.
The news follows Tate and National Galleries Scotland cutting links with art dealer and philanthropist Anthony d’Offay after sexual harassment claims emerged earlier this year. Meanwhile, various arts charities have been recipients of funds from the Presidents Club, which hit the headlines for claims of sexual harassment at a fundraising event in London.
Daniel Fluskey, the head of policy and research at the Institute of Fundraising, says the Charity Commission requires due diligence on donations. “It’s mainly to make sure that money you receive isn’t linked to terrorism or suspicious activity, or the proceeds of crime or money laundering,” he says. “If you think there is a suspicious donation, you must alert the commission. It’s a specific legal requirement.
“However, most of what we see in the press isn’t to do with that side of it, it’s mostly from an ethical point of view. There is an overall duty for trustees to make the decisions that will best enable their charity to meet its objectives and cause. It’s not enough to say we would want to refuse this donation as a show of our distaste, as the bar is slightly higher than that. It’s got to be a considered view, saying not accepting this money is in the best long-term interests of the charity. In most cases, accepting money will enable your charity to do more good.”
Framework needed
Others highlight the need for a framework to provide ethical support to institutions that have relationships with philanthropists.
Jo Baring is the director and curator of the Ingram Collection, which features 600 works of modern and contemporary art collected by media entrepreneur and philanthropist Chris Ingram. Many of the works are on loan to the Lightbox in Woking.
“Ingram’s relationship with the Lightbox was facilitated by the chief executive of Woking council, and they have known him for a while,” says Baring. “I think that is what happens – it happens on an individual basis. Each gallery or museum deals with it themselves.
“There is a need for something more formal, whether it’s the arts council or the Art Fund, or some more formal body to help facilitate those relationships. And part of that would be doing the due diligence on the individual, because currently, it’s done on a case-by-case basis.”
Baring says this could be particularly pressing for local galleries and museums.
“A local gallery is not in a position to give back a great deal of money in the event of a scandal,” she says. “It’s complicated. Institutions are in need of private benefactors and philanthropy, but there should be someone for people to ring up and ask what should concern them and what things they should be looking at. For example, to what extent do you delve into someone’s background, and whether that would put potential benefactors off?”
The Museums Association’s Code of Ethics includes advice on museums and institutional integrity. It recommends: “Carefully consider offers of financial support from commercial organisations and other sources in the UK and internationally and seek support from organisations whose ethical values are consistent with those of the museum.”
Last month, there were anti-drugs protests at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art over its links with the Sackler family, after whom a wing is named. Brothers Arthur, Mortimer and Raymond Sackler donated $3.5m for the construction of a wing of the museum in the 1970s. The family is behind the company that makes OxyContin, a widely prescribed and abused painkiller. The Sacklers have also donated funds to London’s Serpentine Gallery and the Royal Academy of Arts.
The news follows Tate and National Galleries Scotland cutting links with art dealer and philanthropist Anthony d’Offay after sexual harassment claims emerged earlier this year. Meanwhile, various arts charities have been recipients of funds from the Presidents Club, which hit the headlines for claims of sexual harassment at a fundraising event in London.
Daniel Fluskey, the head of policy and research at the Institute of Fundraising, says the Charity Commission requires due diligence on donations. “It’s mainly to make sure that money you receive isn’t linked to terrorism or suspicious activity, or the proceeds of crime or money laundering,” he says. “If you think there is a suspicious donation, you must alert the commission. It’s a specific legal requirement.
“However, most of what we see in the press isn’t to do with that side of it, it’s mostly from an ethical point of view. There is an overall duty for trustees to make the decisions that will best enable their charity to meet its objectives and cause. It’s not enough to say we would want to refuse this donation as a show of our distaste, as the bar is slightly higher than that. It’s got to be a considered view, saying not accepting this money is in the best long-term interests of the charity. In most cases, accepting money will enable your charity to do more good.”
Framework needed
Others highlight the need for a framework to provide ethical support to institutions that have relationships with philanthropists.
Jo Baring is the director and curator of the Ingram Collection, which features 600 works of modern and contemporary art collected by media entrepreneur and philanthropist Chris Ingram. Many of the works are on loan to the Lightbox in Woking.
“Ingram’s relationship with the Lightbox was facilitated by the chief executive of Woking council, and they have known him for a while,” says Baring. “I think that is what happens – it happens on an individual basis. Each gallery or museum deals with it themselves.
“There is a need for something more formal, whether it’s the arts council or the Art Fund, or some more formal body to help facilitate those relationships. And part of that would be doing the due diligence on the individual, because currently, it’s done on a case-by-case basis.”
Baring says this could be particularly pressing for local galleries and museums.
“A local gallery is not in a position to give back a great deal of money in the event of a scandal,” she says. “It’s complicated. Institutions are in need of private benefactors and philanthropy, but there should be someone for people to ring up and ask what should concern them and what things they should be looking at. For example, to what extent do you delve into someone’s background, and whether that would put potential benefactors off?”
The Museums Association’s Code of Ethics includes advice on museums and institutional integrity. It recommends: “Carefully consider offers of financial support from commercial organisations and other sources in the UK and internationally and seek support from organisations whose ethical values are consistent with those of the museum.”