Most philanthropy commentary is written by people standing outside the sector looking in. Foundation press releases. Consulting firm whitepapers. Academic papers that arrive three years after the decision was made. Useful in their own way. Not built for the donor who needs to decide whether to write a check this quarter.
Glaisman Research exists for a different audience. The philanthropist who has accumulated meaningful wealth and now wants to give well, not just give. The wealth advisor whose client just asked about a Donor Advised Fund and is not sure where to start. The nonprofit board chair who knows something is off but cannot quite name it. People making decisions, not writing footnotes.
What you will find here is written from inside the sector by practitioners who have spent decades inside development, operations, finance, and the boardroom. Same standpoint as the Glaisman Fundability Assessment we apply on client engagements. Same voice as The Informed Funder newsletter. Longer form, slower cadence, and meant to outlast the week it was published.
A few things this section will and will not do. It will publish field notes from real engagements, frameworks we use in our own work, and cause area orientations that go deeper than the newsletter format allows. It will not repackage rating site data, recap conference panels, or chase whatever philanthropy headline is moving this week. There are plenty of outlets for that work. This is not one of them.
If you find an article here useful, the practical next step is usually a conversation. Most of what we publish points at questions we work through with clients in detail. A free strategy call is the cleanest way to find out whether that is a fit.