A campaign of mBOLDen Action
Fidelity Charitable, Vanguard Charitable, DAFgiving360 (Schwab), and Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund froze SPLC grants before any court weighed the facts. Six other sponsors held the line. Five wouldn't say. Here's where each one stands and how to move your account if you don't like the answer.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) remains an IRS-recognized 501(c)(3) in good standing. For over fifty years, it has served as a pillar of American civil rights litigation — successfully bankrupting the nation's largest white supremacist organizations and identifying hate groups that other institutions were too timid to confront.
In late April 2026, Fidelity Charitable and Vanguard Charitable — the two largest donor-advised fund sponsors in the country — blocked their account holders from recommending grants to the SPLC, citing a federal indictment from the Department of Justice. DAFgiving360 (formerly Schwab Charitable) followed two days later. Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund stated it would not permit grants to organizations under federal indictment.
This isn't neutrality.
A donor-advised fund sponsor that freezes grants on indictment alone has handed the federal government a defunding mechanism that does not require prevailing in court.
"Giving platforms are not acting neutrally when they cut off access to charitable resources based solely on a charge, before any court has weighed the facts. They are imposing a penalty in advance of due process, reinforcing the very deterrent effect such prosecutions are intended to produce, and weakening civil society in the process." Fred Blackwell, CEO, The San Francisco Foundation. Read the full statement at sff.org →
This isn't about defending the SPLC. The SPLC has a nearly $800 million reserve and a national infrastructure. It can take care of itself.
The precedent being set is about every smaller civil rights group, every immigrant rights litigator, every voter-protection and reproductive-rights nonprofit that does not have nine figures in reserve.
The chill that follows runs through the organizations mBOLDen Change supports, partners with, and learns from every day.
The scorecard tracks the ten largest DAF sponsors by grant volume and a handful of values-aligned alternatives — fifteen sponsors out of more than 1,100 reporting DAF assets nationally.
Don't see your sponsor? Help us add them →
Continue grants to the SPLC after the April 21 indictment.
"An indictment is an allegation. It is not a conviction."
Source ↗formerly Amalgamated Foundation / Amalgamated Charitable Foundation
AUM+ is mission-aligned with the held-the-line position.
Granting out over 75% of assets annually — roughly 3.5x the sector average
Source ↗"Daffy continues to allow donations to the SPLC, stating that it generally relies on the IRS's determination of tax-exempt status. The SPLC remains in good standing with the IRS, the company said."
Source ↗Continues to allow grants under IRS-determined eligibility.
Source ↗SPLC's Vote Your Voice fund ($130M / 10-yr voter engagement) is housed at Tides.
57% DAF payout rate (2023) — nearly 3x the sector average
Source ↗Continues to allow grants under IRS-determined eligibility.
Source ↗Blocked SPLC grants without due process.
Froze: 2026-04-29
"Fidelity Charitable is aware of an ongoing governmental investigation into Southern Poverty Law Center."
Source ↗Froze: 2026-04-29
"The organization has had allegations and/or charges brought against them for activities that may call into question their ability to carry out their tax-exempt charitable purpose."
Source ↗formerly Schwab Charitable
Froze: 2026-05-01
"If a governing body of a charity declares an investigation into a charity it oversees, DAFgiving360 may suspend grants to the organization."
Source ↗Froze: 2026-04-30
"We would not allow donations from our donor advised funds to be directed to an organization under federal criminal indictment."
Source ↗Top-10 sponsors that have not issued a public statement.
No public statement on the SPLC freeze.
No public statement on the SPLC freeze.
No public statement on the SPLC freeze.
formerly Network for Good
No public statement on the SPLC freeze.
No public statement on the SPLC freeze.
National Christian Foundation appears in the top 10 by grant volume but is excluded from the scorecard; it has historically funded SPLC-designated hate groups and is ideologically misaligned with the donors this campaign serves.
Today the target is a fifty-year civil rights institution. Tomorrow, giving platforms could use the same logic and motivation to block grants to immigrant rights organizations, climate groups, a voting-rights nonprofit, and other civil rights movements who are targeted by the government. The case will change. The chill will spread.
Most of the country's largest DAF sponsors are investment banks masquerading as nonprofits. Here are seven questions you can ask to determine whether your sponsor prioritizes community impact or minting profits off of your charitable goals.
This is the sponsor's payout rate. The sector average is around 22% — most DAF money sits while a small share reaches charities. AUM+ moves more than 75% annually. Tides Foundation moves 57%. A high payout rate tells you the sponsor is working to keep dollars moving — recruiting donors who give and prompting balances to flow.
The dollars in your DAF stay invested until you recommend a grant — sometimes for years. ESG, SRI, and impact pools mean those dollars aren't funding private prisons or fossil fuels while they wait.
Some sponsors exist to put charitable dollars to work — they have a mission, they make grants, they take public positions. Others answer to executives whose first job is to protect the institution. The governance tells you whose side they're on.
Most sponsors charge fees based on your account balance. This means the more you give away, the less money they make. They are paid to keep your charitable dollars in their building, not the community's. If they won't give you a straight "No," you have your answer.
Two fees stack: an admin fee on the sponsor side, and an investment fee inside the funds your balance sits in. Most charge a tiered percentage of your balance. Some — like Daffy — charge a flat monthly fee instead.
When a sponsor blocks a grant, do they publish the reason? Do they post their charge-triggered freeze policy? Or do you only find out by trying — and then by reading the news?
The follow-up to the question above. Most sponsors publish broad granting guidelines (qualified 501(c)(3)s, charitable purposes) but not the specifics — what triggers a block, what investigations qualify, what the appeal process is. Without the specifics, sponsors decide case-by-case and the donor finds out by trying.
Five steps. No tax consequences. No reason required. Four to eight weeks end-to-end.
Open the scorecard above. The held-the-line bucket lists sponsors that continue to allow grants.
Sign up at the new sponsor. Most accept new accounts in days, not weeks.
Submit the transfer request to your current sponsor — not the new one. Request the full account balance be transferred to the new sponsor as a grant.
In-kind (securities transferred as-is) or liquidated to cash. Confirm with your current sponsor. Pending grant recommendations may be affected.
No tax consequences. No loss of prior deductions. The transfer is sponsor-to-sponsor and does not pass through you.
Have an update or information about a DAF sponsor that isn't listed on our scorecard? Email us at movemydaf@mboldenaction.org.