The family giving plan
Rees Calder · 27 April 2026 · 7 min read
An estimated $84 trillion will pass between generations in the US alone between 2021 and 2045 (Cerulli Associates, 2024). In the UK, Kings Court Trust estimates £5.5 trillion will transfer by 2050. Most of those conversations about money will happen awkwardly, too late, or not at all. Almost none of them will include a deliberate discussion about giving.
That's a missed opportunity on two levels. First, the money: Fidelity Charitable's 2024 donor survey found that families who discuss giving together give 2.1x more than demographically matched families who don't. Second, the culture: the 21/64 Next Gen Donors study (Johnson Center, 2023) found that 65% of next-generation donors want to give differently from their parents, but 80% want family input in their giving decisions. The demand for family giving conversations exists. The supply is almost zero.
Why families don't talk about giving
Three barriers, all addressable.
Money taboo. The UK has a deep cultural norm against discussing personal finances. The FCA's Financial Lives survey (2022) found that 40% of UK adults have never discussed household finances with their partner in detail, let alone with children or extended family. Giving is even more taboo than spending because it adds a moral dimension. People worry about seeming self-righteous, competitive, or judgmental.
No format. There's no established social ritual for discussing family giving. Dinner conversations have a format. Family holidays have a format. "Let's sit down and talk about our charitable donations" has no script, no precedent, and no cultural model for most families. Without a format, the conversation feels awkward and never starts.
Assumption of alignment. Most couples assume they agree about giving. They often don't. The study cited in "The partner problem" (Dew, 2011, Journal of Financial Therapy) found that couples disagree about charitable giving allocation in 35% of households, but only 12% have explicitly discussed it. The gap between assumed and actual alignment is where resentment and inertia live.
The annual family giving night
One evening per year. Structured, repeatable, and designed to be genuinely enjoyable rather than worthy and dull.
When: Late November or early December. Before the end-of-year giving rush but after enough of the year has passed to review. Some families prefer January, making it a forward-looking exercise. Either works.
Who: Everyone in the household who's old enough to have an opinion. For young children (ages 4-8), participation means choosing one cause they care about. For older children and teenagers, participation means reviewing the family's giving and making a case for their priorities. For adults, it means bringing the numbers and being open to changing the plan.
Duration: 60-90 minutes. Not a marathon. If it goes longer, people stop wanting to do it next year.
The format
Five steps, tested by the National Philanthropic Trust's family philanthropy programmes and adapted from the Rockefeller family's giving meeting model (which, obviously, operates at a different financial scale but uses the same structure).
Step 1: The review (15 minutes). One person presents last year's giving data: total amount, percentage of income, number of recipients, planned vs. reactive split. If you keep a giving dashboard (see "The giving dashboard"), this takes two minutes to prepare. If you don't, pull bank statements for the year. No judgment on the numbers. Just the facts.
Step 2: The reflection (10 minutes). Each person answers one question: what was the most meaningful giving moment this year? Not the largest donation. The most meaningful. This surfaces values that numbers can't capture. A teenager might cite the £10 they gave to a friend's fundraiser. A parent might cite the monthly donation they forgot they'd set up. Both are valid and interesting.
Step 3: The priorities (20 minutes). Each person nominates one cause area or charity they want the family to support next year, with a brief case for why. No vetoes at this stage. Just pitches. The 21/64 research shows that giving younger family members genuine voice (not performative inclusion) is the single strongest predictor of sustained family giving across generations.
Step 4: The allocation (20 minutes). Decide together how to split the family's giving budget across the nominated causes. This is the hard part. Three approaches that work:
- Equal voice: Each family member gets an equal share of the budget to direct. Simple, democratic, and especially good for families with children.
- Consensus with a core: Allocate 60-70% to causes the family agrees on, then give each person 30-40% to direct individually. Preserves alignment while allowing personal expression.
- One big, many small: Pick one primary charity for the majority of the budget (based on evidence and family discussion), then allow small discretionary gifts throughout the year.
Step 5: The commitment (10 minutes). Write down what you decided. Set up the standing orders or schedule the donations. Assign someone to track progress. Put next year's giving night in the calendar. The commitment mechanisms from behavioural science apply here: implementation intentions (Gollwitzer, 1999) are 2-3x more likely to be followed through than vague goals.
What changes
Three effects that families consistently report, based on NPT programme data and Fidelity Charitable's family giving survey.
Giving increases. The 2.1x multiplier isn't just about having more money. It's about accountability. When giving is visible to the family, the social commitment effect kicks in. You're less likely to quietly reduce your standing orders when everyone discussed them together in November.
Children develop giving habits earlier. The Lilly Family School of Philanthropy (Indiana University, 2024) found that children who participate in family giving decisions before age 12 are 3.4x more likely to be regular donors as adults than children who didn't. The mechanism isn't the money (children's contributions are tiny). It's the identity formation: "I am someone who gives" becomes part of the self-concept during the critical developmental window.
Couples align. The conversation that most couples avoid (how much should we give and to whom?) gets a structured container. Post-giving-night disagreement about charitable spending drops substantially because the decision was made together rather than unilaterally.
For different family types
Single-income household with young children. Keep it simple. The giving night might be 30 minutes. Let children pick one cause from a shortlist of three (you curate the shortlist). The goal is participation and habit, not optimisation.
Dual-income household, no kids. Focus on the partner alignment dimension. The giving night is partly a financial planning conversation and partly a values conversation. Use it to reconcile potentially different giving priorities.
Multi-generational family. The Rockefeller model scales up: each generation or household unit proposes causes, and the family allocates from a shared pool. This is where family donor-advised funds (DAFs) become useful. NPT reports that family DAFs grew 34% between 2020 and 2023, partly because they provide a simple legal structure for pooled family giving.
Single person. The "family" giving night can be done solo or with friends. The structure (review, reflect, prioritise, allocate, commit) works for any group that wants to make giving more deliberate. Several Giving What We Can local groups run annual giving nights using a similar format.
One sentence
One evening a year, structured simply: review last year's giving, let everyone pitch a cause, allocate the budget together, and write it down. Families that do this give twice as much as those that don't.
Sources used: Cerulli Associates US intergenerational wealth transfer estimate (2024), Kings Court Trust UK wealth transfer projection (2023), Fidelity Charitable family giving survey and 2.1x multiplier finding (2024), 21/64 Next Gen Donors study (Johnson Center for Philanthropy, 2023), FCA Financial Lives survey money taboo data (2022), Dew "Financial Issues as Predictors of Divorce" (Journal of Financial Therapy, 2011), National Philanthropic Trust family DAF growth data (2024), Lilly Family School of Philanthropy childhood giving participation study (2024), Gollwitzer "Implementation Intentions" (American Psychologist, 1999). Full links in the planning doc.