Christine K. Galloway
Okabena Company
Jill M. Koosmann
HRK Group
Don
Wally
Doug
Bruce
Ken
2
1918 1946 1962 1967 1975 -
2000 -
The Dayton Foundation is created with an endowment of $1 million
The Dayton Company’s bylaws establish the practice of giving 5% of
pretax profits back to the community
The Dayton Company enters discount merchandising with the opening of its first
Target Store
The Dayton Corporation has its first public offering of common stock. Okabena
Company is incorporated.
K.N. Dayton instrumental in starting “Five Percent Club” today called “Keystone
Club” – member corporations agree to give away 5 percent of pre-tax profits
for philanthropy. Some corporations give 2 percent.
Dayton Hudson Corp. changes its name to Target Corporation
3
Hans Andersen
1854 - 1914
Andersen Lumber Company
1903
4
Fred Andersen
1886 - 1979
By 1929 builds Andersen into the largest
specialized window company in the country 5
a title it still holds today.
1903 - Hans Andersen founded Andersen Lumbering Company; now Andersen Corporation
1914 - Hans introduced his underlying business theory:
1. Make a product that is different and better 2. Hire the best people and pay top wages
3. Provide steady employment insofar as humanly possible 4. Reward ideas and share with your community
1914 - Hans signed the first profit-sharing checks for employees
1941 - Bayport Foundation is established, which is a corporate foundation and funded
annually from Andersen Corporation’s profits
1959 - Andersen Foundation is established by Fred Andersen (Hans’ son – G2)
1962 - Hugh J. Andersen Foundation established by Hugh Andersen (G3)
1962 - MAHADH Foundation (now HRK Foundation) established by Bill and Betty Hulings
(G3)
1975 - Fred Andersen sold partial ownership in Andersen Corporation to its employees
through a stock ownership trust
1987 - Katherine B. Andersen Fund of the St. Paul Foundation is established
2003 - Andersen celebrates 100 years in business with a partnership with Habitat for
Humanity to build 100 homes
Andersen Corporation is still privately held and all five foundations/funds are still running
strong
6
Foundations
Foundation
#1
Chadwick
Wood-Rill
Foundation
#2
Foundation
#3
WM
Oakleaf
Meadowood
7
Mission Statement: To deliver superior and creative, integrated financial
services, founded on our core principles of integrity, dedication, and
respect.
Okabena Company (parent)
•
•
•
•
Integrated financial, tax and estate planning
Family continuity and client education
Foundation administration and compliance
Accounting, reporting and compliance
Okabena Investment Services, Inc. (subsidiary)
• Strategic and tactical asset allocation
• Manager selection and monitoring
Boulder Bridge Trust Company (subsidiary)
• Trusteeship
• Trust Administration
• Executorship
8
Andersen Foundation (FKA
Bayport Foundation)
1941
Fred C. & Katherine B.
Andersen Foundation (FKA
Andersen Foundation)
1959
Hugh J. Andersen
Foundation
1962
HRK Foundation (FKA
MAHADH Foundation)
1962
Katherine B. Andersen Fund
of the St. Paul Foundation
1987
Habitat for Humanity
St. Croix Valley
The Andersen Related Foundations meet often, collaborate regularly,
but never speak for each other.
9
HRK
Foundation
MAHADH
Fund
Family Fund
#1
Family Fund
#2
Family Fund
#3
Family Fund
#4
Family Fund
#5
Family Fund
#6
10
• Integration of long-term investment, financial, tax, and
philanthropic estate plans
• Leadership team consists of CEO, CFO, CIO & CPO
• Family motto = “Good Stewards with a Generous Spirit”
• HRK Foundation structure allows for “life-cycle” giving due to
having seven funds under one foundation umbrella (older
generations give more from their funds and younger
generations build their funds as they grow into their
philanthropy)
• Family members contribute annually to their funds so the
Foundation’s giving is a combination of 5% of the endowments
and pass-through from annual giving
11
• Family has a strong tradition of general operating support and
“quiet giving” – and they believe “showing up” consistently for
grantees is important
• Family believes that giving consists of more than just grants –
PRIs, Impact Investing, volunteering, advocacy, networking
funders
12
Pros
Cons
• Diffuses potential for conflict
• Creates flexibility to focus on
individual philanthropic
objectives
• Increased number of
individuals involved in
philanthropic decisions
• Reduced complexity – family
dynamics
• Increased complexity –
administration
• Allows for anonymous giving
• Lack of asset aggregation
reduces potential impact of
charitable dollars
• No family “glue”
• Does not promote a unified
family legacy
13
Pros
Cons
• Family has the support of the
family office
• Flexibility in giving by each
family unit
• Individual passions can be
funded
• Collaboration can increase
grant impact
• Provides family “glue”
• Formal structure that meets
regularly
• Conflicts can arise from
consensus giving on common
fund
14
• Langwater Foundation
• 5th Generation (pooled)
15