1. THE LANDSCAPE OF ATHLETE PHILANTHROPY: IS GIVING PART OF THE GAME? KATHY BABIAK, PH.D.

2. SESSION OBJECTIVES Why is this an interesting phenomenon? To present the ‘landscape’ of athlete philanthropy – who is formalizing their philanthropy, profile of athletes who start foundations, type and focus of foundations Highlight opportunities and challenges related to athlete philanthropy Discuss future research opportunities

5. WHY ATHLETE PHILANTHROPY? Increased attention to social responsibility and philanthropy in sport organizations. (Babiak & Wolfe, 2006, 2009; Brietbarth & Harris, 2008; Heinze, Soderstrom, & Zdroik, 2014; Inoue, Mahan, & Kent, 2013; Sheth & Babiak, 2010; Smith & Westerbeek, 2007) Professional athletes in major American sports are unique – representing the brand of the team and league as well as their own personal brand. The positive or negative ramifications of nonsporting pursuits influence the value of these brands placing utility in their appraisal. “…many (athletes) may not be aware of the value — to both their communities and their teams — of exercising philanthropy through carefully and strategically structured foundations and programs.” (Babiak, Mills, Tainsky, & Juravich, 2012; Tainsky & Babiak, 2011; Sports Philanthropy Project, 2007)

6. MANY WAYS FOR AN ATHLETE TO BE CHARITABLE Pyramid of Player Involvement Player Foundatio n Donor Advised Fund Partner with Existing Non-Profit(s)

7. METHODS Phase 1: Identification of professional athletes who had (or purported to have) established independent charitable foundations (public or private charities) in professional North American leagues (MLB, NBA, NHL, and NFL – and MLS in 2014). Three time periods – 2005/06, 2008/09 and 2014 / 2015 season rosters. Searched and confirmed on Foundation Center and GuideStar for further detail including whether or not the foundation had filed a Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990- PF, and the total assets, revenues, and expenditures for each respective year.

8. KEY FINDINGS The ‘landscape’ of professional athlete foundations: # of purported foundations # of ‘Official’ foundations

9. KEY FINDINGS The ‘landscape’ of professional athlete foundations: # of purported foundations # of ‘Official’ foundations

10. KEY FINDINGS: PRIVATE VS. PUBLIC FOUNDATIONS BY LEAGUE

11. KEY FINDINGS The ‘landscape’ of professional athlete foundations: Average Salary Average Service Time

12. KEY FINDINGS The ‘landscape’ of professional athlete foundations: Average Salary Average Service Time

13. AVERAGE FOUNDATION INCOME / ASSETS

14. LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS…. Sport Total Number of Athlete Foundations FemaleMale Olympic592831 NBA199 NFL538 MLB152 NHL48 Boxing15 MLS22 Auto Racing33132 PGA36 ATP10 LPGA99 WTA77 WNBA18 Other25223 TOTAL1151651086

15. SUMMARY / CONCLUSIONS Professional athletes are focusing efforts on charitable and philanthropic activities beyond monetary contributions (Knecht, 2007; Tainsky & Babiak, 2007, 2011) by forming charitable non-profit organizations. Athletes who are typically established (i.e., by years of service and salary ) have a higher rate of owning a charitable foundation. Strategic use of athlete’s assets / resources to leverage impact – i.e., celebrity / fame, generate revenues, attract / interest volunteers and partners (Babiak, Mills, Tainsky & Juravich, 2012). By identifying trends in players who have established foundations we can begin to evaluate to what extent philanthropy promotes loyalty and other benefits to the player and his foundation, team, and league. (Kim & Walker, 2013; Lee & Babiak, 2014)

16. SUMMARY / CONCLUSIONS Athletes’ motivations and the benefits they derive from behaving charitably are complex and nuanced. However – several caveats about success and impact: Athletes may not have requisite skills / knowledge to form / run foundation (this has resulted in a number of issues with athlete foundations – including misdirected funds, inadequate oversight, poor leadership, lack of commitment, low impact, lack of measurement or evaluation, high rate of failure ) Scandals / transgressions – impact the brand, identity and image of both athlete and their charitable work leading some to failure (e.g., Mark McGwire) (Lee & Babiak, 2014) Ultimately damaging public trust – of charities and athletes themselves

17. THANK YOU kbabiak@umich.edu