Introduction to Science Philanthropy: Part One

This article is the first in a four-part series to introduce you to the world of science philanthropy. These articles are based on materials developed with support from the Gates Foundation with the goal of increasing philanthropic support for scientific research and development. The materials can be found at Future Science Now. Additional materials, including a Science Philanthropy Giving Guide, can be found at the Gates Foundation Philanthropic Partnerships team website.

__________________

One of the compelling aspects of philanthropic advising is the vast array of causes that donors care about. Are your clients focused on reversing climate change? Eliminating a pernicious disease? Advancing the arts? Improving mental health? Ensuring ethical development of AI?

Amidst all the diversity of interests, there is an often-overlooked through line for achieving impact. No matter what field or issue areas your philanthropists care about, scientific research and development will almost certainly help them achieve their goals. Given recent U.S. federal cuts to science and medical research, there is more opportunity than ever before to support scientific research and development. 

I’ve spent over 35 years working at the intersection of philanthropy and science, and I have had the privilege of influencing over a billion dollars of new philanthropic funding to scientific research. I have worked with hundreds of donors, and I know the concept of “science philanthropy” can feel both cutting edge and a little daunting to many of them. Fortunately there are entry points into science for emerging and established philanthropists that are accessible, such as through a favorite university or an innovative non-profit.

In these articles, I will de-mystify the world of science philanthropy and suggest ways you can inspire your donors to embrace science funding as an effective means to achieve their giving goals. 

Who Funds Science?

Wealthy patrons have been crucial supporters of scientific discovery since at least the 1600s, when the Medici princes funded Galileo’s astronomical research during the Italian Renaissance. At the end of the 19th century, Andrew Carnegie’s financing enabled scientists to pursue knowledge in the natural sciences that led to breakthroughs in astronomy, discoveries of new dinosaur species, and the field of plant genetics. The broader trace of Carnegie’s philanthropy influenced many more donors to value science as a public good and a domain worthy of philanthropic investment. This, in turn, helped foster support for research universities, which became the backbone of U.S. scientific advancement in the 20th century.

Define your Motivation

A good place to get started is to help your clients define their motivation or purpose for financial support in a particular cause area. I know from experience that donors tend to be more committed over the long term if they connect their giving to their personal interest or purpose. Once you know in general where your clients want to focus their philanthropy – new treatments for Alzheimer’s or capturing more carbon to slow climate change – then you can begin to source science solutions.

Science Philanthropy Spotlight

In an initial meeting with a tech billionaire couple, I asked them, “What kind of science are you passionate about?” Remarkably his answer was “astronomy.” My heart began to sing – in my previous career I’d been a fundraiser for astronomy at the University of Chicago, and I knew how rare it was to find self-proclaimed “astronomy-curious” people. However, he quickly added: “But I won’t fund that as it wouldn’t look responsible to my employees and to the public.” The couple eventually focused their philanthropy on health and disease topics, despite their love of astronomy. As generous as their funding has been, it was a reminder to me that what inspires funders, and the role they decide to play as philanthropists, has a myriad of motivations.

What Does Funding Science Mean?

Frequently funders do not think of their interests as “science,” yet their passions have significant scientific components. Perhaps the research is still unclear, such as how a certain cancer develops, or how our cognitive abilities decline as we age. Perhaps more data is needed, such as the most effective ways to integrate AI into elementary school classrooms.

Examples of science solutions:

• You may be advising a donor who wants to support youth mental health. You could suggest they fund research in childhood brain development.

• You may be advising a donor who is concerned about our food systems. You could suggest they fund regenerative agriculture research.

• You may be advising a donor who is interested in uses of AI. You could suggest they fund research in climate prediction and sustainability. 

Defining the Science Research Process - the Tree of Science

Philanthropy is an especially effective lever for impact at the earliest scientific research phases – basic science and applied science. In the later stages – experimental development and commercialization – government, venture capital, and industry invest more heavily.

The Tree of Science describes how ideas grow from early curiosity to real-world impact. Ashleigh Theberge’s CandyCollect strep throat diagnostic “lollipop” provides a vivid example.

In the roots stage, scientists asked basic, curiosity-driven questions about what diseases show up in saliva, running fundamental experiments to detect streptococcus and other bacteria by measuring their DNA and surface proteins, with no guarantee of practical use. This long-term, discovery-driven work laid the groundwork for subsequent research to build on. Funding sources at the roots stage: government and philanthropy. 

In the trunk stage, Dr. Theberge drew on those basic science discoveries and asked a question as a scientist, and a mom: how could the strep bacteria be captured in a child-friendly way? She combined earlier scientific insights about detecting bacterial DNA and proteins with her chemistry expertise in building microfluidic channels, iterating on designs that could trap bacteria in tiny maze-like structures. Then her team tested early strep test device prototypes in the lab, applying this research to something useful. Funding sources at the trunk stage: government and philanthropy. 

In the branches stage, a concrete diagnostic concept existed but needed refinement and evidence. Dr. Theberge’s lab experimented with plastics and coatings that would be safe to suck, yet let bacteria adhere and stay stable long enough for mailing and testing, starting with healthy adults’ oral microbiomes before moving into studies with children, and leveraging pilot and follow-on grants to generate robust datasets. It’s at the branches stage of experimental development that industry and venture funders begin to be interested when products, treatments or diagnostic tools are emerging. Funding sources at the branches stage: government, philanthropy, industry, venture. 

Finally, in the leaves stage, the CandyCollect “lollipop” device evolved into a commercializable product ie: something that can be profitable: a spiral microfluidic lollipop that is less traumatic than throat swabs and designed to be affordable enough for global use. Government, industry and startup funding now dominate as the device moves toward broader markets through Dr. Theberge’s startup, Seabright, LLC,. Funding sources at the leaves stage: government, industry, venture.

Conclusion

Each philanthropist will eventually determine their overall approach to funding science and where they feel they get the most satisfaction, and the most impact. Think expansively about which of your clients may benefit from a conversation that includes solutions through science.

Next Article of Series - Part 2: How Does Giving to Science Work?

©2026 Daylight Advisors, Inc. All rights reserved.