Welcome to Cause & Capital.

Every month in Cause & Capital, I break down a brand’s corporate giving campaign or one of the world’s leading philanthropists, uncovering what worked, why it worked, and how you can apply those insights to your own cause investments, whether you’re giving as a brand or an individual.

Let’s get into it.

In 1972, Edythe Broad bought a Van Gogh drawing for $95,000. She and her husband Eli traded it not long after to acquire a Rauschenberg.

That instinct, buy something extraordinary and then trade toward something with more impact, would define how the Broads approached philanthropy for the next five decades. They gave more than $4 billion. They built institutions that reshaped genomics, contemporary art, and public education in Los Angeles. And they did it with a discipline that most philanthropists talk about but rarely practice: test first, measure results, then scale.

Eli died in 2021. Today, Edythe Broad is the steward of a $1.8 billion foundation, a $2 billion art collection, and a philanthropic legacy that is still very much in motion.

Today, we’re breaking down how they built it and what you can take from their approach.

Edythe Lawson Broad grew up in Detroit, the daughter of a homemaker and a chemist. She attended public schools and developed an early love for art and education. She married Eli Broad in 1954, when she was 18, and he was 21.

Eli would go on to build two Fortune 500 companies: KB Home (originally Kaufman and Broad), a homebuilding company, and SunAmerica, a retirement savings firm he later sold to AIG for $17.8 billion. But the philanthropic work started long before the big money arrived. The couple established the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation in the late 1960s, just a decade into their marriage.

Edythe is the one who brought art into the family. In the early 1970s, she connected with art dealers in New York through Taft Schreiber. The Van Gogh drawing was their first major acquisition. She was friends with contemporary artists throughout the 1970s. Roy Lichtenstein gifted her his Brushstroke Chair and Ottoman sculptures after she admired them in his studio. That personal connection to living artists would shape the Broads’ entire approach to collecting: they believed the greatest art collections are built when the art is being made.

Today, the Broad collection includes nearly 2,000 works of postwar and contemporary art valued at more than $2 billion, with deep holdings by artists such as Jean-Michel Basquiat, Jeff Koons, Cindy Sherman, Ed Ruscha, and Andy Warhol. The Broad Art Foundation, established in 1984, operates as a lending library, making these works available for exhibition at institutions worldwide. The art has been loaned more than 9,000 times.

Edythe’s net worth is estimated at $9.5 billion. She and Eli were among the first to sign the Giving Pledge, committing to donate 75% of their wealth during their lifetimes. As of last year, the Broads met that goal.

The Broads called their approach “entrepreneurship for the public good.” In practice, that meant treating philanthropy the way Eli treated business. They didn’t make large gifts based on relationships or prestige. They identified problems, funded experiments to test solutions, measured whether those solutions worked, and then scaled the ones that did.

The clearest example is the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. In the early 2000s, Eli visited the Whitehead/MIT Center for Genome Research and asked Eric Lander what it would cost to translate the findings of the Human Genome Project into real medical progress. Lander’s answer: $800 million. The Broads didn’t write that check. They committed $100 million over ten years, framing it explicitly as an experiment. If the model worked, they’d invest more. If it didn’t, they’d walk away.

The model worked. In 2005, they doubled the commitment to $200 million. In 2008, they added a $400 million endowment to make the institute permanent. By the time they were done, the Broad Foundation had committed over $1 billion in unrestricted funding to the institute. Today, the Broad Institute has more than 2,500 scientists and is one of the world’s leading centers for genomics research, producing breakthroughs in cancer, diabetes, psychiatric disorders, and infectious diseases.

If a peer would find this useful, forward it. And if someone sent this your way, you can subscribe here:

The Broads concentrated their giving in three areas: education, science, and the arts. Within each, they pursued systemic change rather than incremental support.

In education, they focused on transforming urban public school systems, funding leadership development through the Broad Center (now a program of the Yale School of Management), and awarding the Broad Prize for Urban Education to high-performing districts. This was their most controversial area of giving. Eli was a vocal advocate for charter schools, a stance that drew criticism from teachers’ unions and traditionalists in education. Over time, his enthusiasm for charters waned as the model failed to scale nationally.

In science, the focus was on biomedical research with transformative potential: genomics through the Broad Institute, stem cell research through centers at UCLA, USC, and UCSF (funded with $30 million, $20 million, and a major gift, respectively), and inflammatory bowel disease through the Broad Medical Research Program.

In the arts, Edythe’s influence was strongest. The Broad Stage at Santa Monica College is credited to her. The $140 million Broad museum in downtown Los Angeles, designed by Diller Scofidio + Renfro, opened in 2015 with free general admission, reflecting Edythe’s conviction that great art should be accessible to everyone. The Broads also gave $60 million to build the Broad Contemporary Art Museum at LACMA and funded the Zaha Hadid-designed art museum at Michigan State University, Eli’s alma mater.

The Broads preferred to create new institutions rather than simply fund existing ones. The Broad Institute, the Broad Center, and The Broad museum were all built from scratch with foundation money. When they did partner with existing organizations, they often attached conditions. Their $30 million gift to the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles was contingent on the museum remaining independent and not merging with LACMA.

This approach came with a reputation. Eli was described as hands-on to the point of being demanding. One civic leader said of his philanthropy: “The string attached here is, you get Eli. His money is not the easiest to get.” That intensity was part of the model. The Broads treated their grantees the way a venture capital firm treats portfolio companies: high expectations, close involvement, and accountability for results.

The venture philanthropy framework showed up in several consistent patterns across their giving:

Time-limited experiments: The Broad Institute started as a ten-year venture, not a permanent endowment. The Broad Prize for Urban Education ran from 2002 to 2014, then ended when the foundation decided the model had run its course.

Staged funding: Rather than making one large commitment, they increased funding in stages tied to demonstrated progress. The Broad Institute went from $100M to $200M to $600M to over $1B as results accumulated.

Unrestricted capital: When they did commit at scale, they provided unrestricted funding. This gave institutions the flexibility to pursue the most promising research without being tied to specific grant deliverables.

Institution-building over check writing: The Broads preferred to create durable organizations that would outlast their involvement, rather than simply fund programs within existing structures.

Total giving: More than $4 billion across education, science, the arts, and Los Angeles civic causes

Foundation assets: Approximately $1.8 billion as of 2024

Broad Institute: Over $1 billion in unrestricted funding; 2,500+ scientists; breakthroughs in cancer, diabetes, psychiatric disorders, and infectious disease

Art lending: The Broad Art Foundation has loaned works more than 9,000 times to institutions worldwide

Los Angeles investment: Roughly $1 billion pledged to LA art institutions alone, plus civic infrastructure like the Walt Disney Concert Hall fundraising campaign

Giving Pledge: Committed to giving 75% of their wealth during their lifetimes; that goal was met as of 2024

The staged funding model created real accountability. By framing the Broad Institute as an experiment with a defined timeline, the Broads gave themselves permission to walk away if the results weren’t there. That discipline forced the institute to demonstrate value early and often. It also gave the Broads confidence to scale dramatically when the evidence supported it. Most philanthropists make a large gift and hope for the best. The Broads made a moderate gift and demanded proof before making a larger one.

Building institutions instead of funding programs created lasting infrastructure. The Broad Institute, The Broad, and The Broad Center are independent entities that continue to operate and grow beyond the Broads’ direct involvement. This is a fundamentally different outcome than making grants to existing organizations, which can redirect or discontinue programs when funding priorities change.

Making the museum free removed the barrier that keeps philanthropy exclusive. The Broad museum in downtown LA offers free general admission. That decision, which reflects Edythe’s belief that art belongs to everyone, has made the collection accessible to audiences who would never set foot in a paid museum. It’s a simple choice that signals something important about who philanthropy is for.

Unrestricted funding at scale unlocked breakthroughs. By providing over $1 billion in unrestricted funding to the Broad Institute, the Broads allowed scientists to pursue the most promising lines of research without being constrained by narrow grant requirements. This is rare in philanthropy, and it mattered. The institute’s researchers have identified genetic risk factors for dozens of diseases, classified cancers by genomic alterations, and developed foundational tools used by scientists worldwide.

The education legacy is complicated. The Broads were among the most prominent funders of charter school expansion in the country. A 2015 report revealed a plan to charterize 50% of Los Angeles public schools — it drew significant backlash, and Eli's enthusiasm for the model eventually waned as it failed to scale. He was willing to walk away from experiments that didn't work. This was one of them.

The foundation has also pulled back geographically. What began as a national education reform effort is now concentrated in Los Angeles. The tradeoff is real: deeper local impact, less national influence.

Succession is the open question. Eli's hands-on intensity was inseparable from how the model worked. Grantees knew they were getting Eli, not just his money. Edythe has kept the work going and met the Giving Pledge commitment. But the foundation was never designed to exist in perpetuity, and no sunset date has been announced. What she does with the remaining fortune is entirely her call — and probably the most consequential philanthropic decision still in motion.

Fund experiments, not assumptions. The ten-year venture model at the Broad Institute gave both the funder and the institution a framework for honest evaluation. If you’re considering a major philanthropic commitment, build in a testing phase with clear milestones before committing at full scale.

When the evidence is there, go big and go unrestricted. Restricted gifts create overhead and limit flexibility. The Broads’ willingness to provide unrestricted capital at scale is one of the main reasons the Broad Institute was able to pursue high-risk, high-reward research that traditional grant funding would never have supported.

Build things that outlast you. The Broads’ preference for creating permanent institutions means their impact continues regardless of what happens to the foundation itself. If your philanthropy depends entirely on your continued involvement, it isn’t durable.

Make access part of the design. Free admission at The Broad. An art lending library that has placed works in institutions 9,000 times. These are design choices that determine who benefits from philanthropy. If you’re building something for the public good, make sure the public can actually reach it.

Eli was the one who coined "entrepreneurship for the public good." But Edythe was the one who understood what public meant. Free admission. A lending library. Art collected in relation to living artists. These weren't Eli's instincts — they were hers. As she decides what to do with the remaining fortune and the foundation's future, that instinct may be the most important asset she's working with.

See you in two weeks for the monthly wrap.
​Christine​

PS — If this issue landed for you from the fundraising side — thinking about how your organization partners with corporate donors or makes the case for cause investment — I also publish a short weekly brief called Chief Fundraiser Weekly. It's focused on the decisions that come with owning the revenue number. If that's part of your world, you can find it here: Chief Fundraiser Weekly.

Are you thinking about how to give more intentionally?

I’ve spent more than 30 years inside the nonprofit world, working with donors and organizations to understand what truly drives lasting impact. With thousands of worthy causes out there, clarity matters, and I help bring it.

If a conversation would be helpful for your planning, contact me anytime at [email protected].