Legacy giving allows a person to include a charitable purpose or organization in an estate plan so that selected resources can support a mission after the donor’s lifetime. In the United States, that intention may involve a will, trust or beneficiary designation, which makes legal coordination as important as philanthropic intent.
Executive summary
- Charitable bequests contributed an estimated $62.19 billion to U.S. charities in 2025.
- Bequest giving increased 19.7% from 2024, although Giving USA notes that this source can fluctuate substantially from year to year.
- U.S. estate guidance recognizes charitable transfers through wills, trusts and certain non-probate beneficiary designations.
- Selecting a nonprofit requires more than personal affinity; its legal identity, tax status and long-term ability to carry out the intended purpose matter.
- Probate and estate rules differ across states, making jurisdiction-specific professional review important.
- For Roberto Isaias, the strongest framework is to view a charitable legacy as a continuity decision: what should continue, who can carry it forward and what happens if circumstances change.
What is legacy giving?
Legacy giving is the practice of arranging for assets or resources to benefit a charitable organization or purpose after a donor’s death. In U.S. philanthropy, related terms include planned giving, charitable bequest and bequest giving. The National Council of Nonprofits also uses legacy and planned giving as closely related concepts.
A durable charitable legacy starts by defining the purpose, then identifying the organization, legal mechanism and conditions required for execution. The appropriate structure depends on the donor’s assets, family circumstances, state of residence and applicable law. This article is educational and should not replace individualized legal or tax advice.
Five decisions to make before documents are finalized
- State what cause or outcome the gift should support.
- Verify the beneficiary organization’s legal identity.
- Coordinate wills, trusts and beneficiary designations.
- Avoid restrictions that could become impossible to fulfill.
- Review organizations, documents and beneficiaries periodically.
- Executive summary
- What is legacy giving?
- Why the 2025 numbers matter
- The Permanence Map: four decisions before leaving a charitable gift
- 1. Define the purpose before the institution
- 2. Identify the beneficiary precisely
- 3. Select the mechanism after reviewing the assets
- 4. Decide what should happen when the future changes
- A decision matrix for long-term durability
- What structures can be used in the United States?
- How to assess whether a nonprofit can carry the mission forward
- Passing philanthropic intent across generations
- Roberto Isaias: separating memory, purpose and execution
- Four ways a long-term charitable plan can break
- The organization no longer exists
- The restriction becomes impossible to fulfill
- Documents point to different beneficiaries
- The organization was never properly verified
- The ten-signal durability test
- Frequently asked questions about charitable legacy planning
- Continuity is designed before the documents are signed
- Sources
Why the 2025 numbers matter
Charitable bequests are a substantial component of U.S. philanthropy.
Giving USA 2026 estimated that bequests accounted for $62.19 billion in charitable giving during 2025, within $617.20 billion in total giving from individuals, foundations, bequests and corporations. Bequest giving increased 19.7% in current dollars and 16.6% after inflation.
That increase needs context. Giving USA specifically notes that bequests tend to fluctuate from year to year. They have risen about 20% or more in current dollars in three of the last four years, but the 2025 increase should not be treated as a guaranteed future growth rate.
For the editorial framework used by Roberto Isaias, the scale of charitable bequests leads to a more useful question: how can a decision written today remain understandable and executable decades later?
The Permanence Map: four decisions before leaving a charitable gift
The core of this framework does not begin with a financial product. It begins with four questions designed to test whether a charitable intention can remain useful over time.
1. Define the purpose before the institution
A donor may feel strongly connected to one nonprofit, but an organization and a cause are not identical.
The first task is to describe the objective: education, medical research, food security, environmental protection, arts, children’s services or another priority. The second task is choosing an organization capable of advancing that objective.
This distinction becomes especially important for long-term plans. Organizations can merge, change programs, adopt new names or cease operating.
A clearly stated purpose gives future decision-makers more context for understanding what the donor actually intended.
2. Identify the beneficiary precisely
An informal organization name may not be sufficient for an estate document.
The IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search, or TEOS, lets the public review information about tax-exempt organizations, their eligibility to receive tax-deductible contributions and available Form 990 filings.
IRS examination guidelines for charitable bequests also emphasize determining whether the transfer is made to a qualified beneficiary. Importantly, the IRS notes that an organization being exempt for income-tax purposes does not automatically establish eligibility for an estate or gift tax charitable deduction.
That makes precise verification more than an administrative detail.
3. Select the mechanism after reviewing the assets
The right instrument depends partly on the property involved and how that property is owned.
IRS guidance for Schedule O recognizes distributions made under a will, trust or other non-probate beneficiary designation. The agency specifically lists arrangements involving assets such as life insurance and IRAs among the possible contexts.
These mechanisms are not interchangeable.
A will, trust and contractual beneficiary designation can follow different legal rules and distribution processes. The appropriate structure should therefore follow the facts of the estate rather than a generic philanthropic formula.
4. Decide what should happen when the future changes
Long-lived plans need some ability to withstand change.
A highly restrictive gift may become difficult to administer if the named program no longer exists. Similarly, a plan should consider what happens if the selected organization closes or materially changes.
The objective is not to predict every future event. It is to make the donor’s intent clear enough that the plan can remain meaningful when circumstances evolve.
A decision matrix for long-term durability
| Scenario | Decision to clarify | Evidence to review | Long-term limitation |
| Gift to one organization | Exact beneficiary identity | Legal name, EIN, TEOS and public records | Organization could change or close |
| Support for a broader cause | Primary charitable purpose | Mission, programs and institutional capacity | Overly broad language can lose precision |
| Asset with named beneficiary | Coordination across documents | Current beneficiary forms and estate documents | An outdated form can redirect the asset |
| Restricted charitable gift | Permitted use of funds | Written terms and operational capacity | Narrow restrictions can become impractical |
| Multi-decade plan | Alternative if circumstances change | Professionally drafted contingency terms | Future conditions cannot be fully predicted |
What structures can be used in the United States?
There is no single structure that is appropriate for every donor.
A charitable provision in a will
A will can direct the distribution of certain property after death.
The American Bar Association explains that when someone dies without a will, state intestacy laws determine the default distribution of property. Those laws vary by state. A valid will allows an individual to change that default plan within the boundaries of applicable law.
A charitable provision should accurately identify the intended beneficiary and describe the property, amount or share involved.
Trust-based planning
Trusts can serve several purposes within an estate plan, including management and distribution of assets.
More specialized vehicles include charitable remainder trusts and other split-interest structures. They are subject to specific rules and can carry significant legal, administrative and tax complexity. Recent IRS material continues to address rules applicable to charitable remainder unitrusts and other split-interest trusts.
Complexity should therefore solve a genuine planning need rather than become an objective by itself.
Beneficiary designations
Some assets pass under contractual beneficiary instructions rather than through the provisions of a will.
Coordination matters. A 2025 American Bar Association probate review discussed litigation involving a brokerage account where a beneficiary designation could prevent a will provision from producing the intended outcome.
The broader planning lesson is important: estate documents should be reviewed as one system.
How to assess whether a nonprofit can carry the mission forward
Choosing a cause based on personal conviction is only the beginning.
From Roberto Isaias’ continuity-oriented perspective, a long-term beneficiary should be evaluated not simply on whether its current work is appealing, but on whether sufficient evidence supports entrusting it with an intention that may not be executed for many years.
Verify before relying on assumptions
TEOS allows users to inspect an organization’s tax status and available IRS filings.
The IRS also requires public access to certain exemption applications and annual returns. Those records can contribute to a more informed review of a tax-exempt organization’s structure and activities.
A reasonable review can consider:
- legal name and EIN;
- current exempt status;
- available Form 990 filings;
- institutional mission;
- programs relevant to the intended purpose;
- governance and organizational continuity;
- restricted-gift policies;
- capacity to accept the intended type of asset.
Financial analysis should not be reduced to a single overhead ratio. Different nonprofit operating models require different cost structures, and one isolated percentage rarely establishes effectiveness.
Passing philanthropic intent across generations
An estate decision belongs to the donor, but charitable values can extend across generations.
A 2025 Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy study found that Millennial and Gen Z donors tend to be issue-focused, use technology heavily to inform their charitable decisions and seek trustworthy and transparent nonprofits.
The research was not specifically a study of charitable bequests, so it should not be presented as evidence about estate-giving behavior. It does, however, provide useful context for families interested in transferring philanthropic values along with financial assets.
A separate 2025 Bank of America Study of Philanthropy, researched with the Lilly Family School, reported that 79% of affluent donor households supported their local communities in 2024. This figure also relates to current giving rather than bequests, but it illustrates the continuing importance of community connection in charitable decision-making.
A family conversation can therefore explain why a cause matters, what principles motivated the decision and whether future generations are expected to participate.
Roberto Isaias: separating memory, purpose and execution
A donor’s name can remain associated with a gift, but philanthropic continuity requires more than recognition.
In the framework presented by Roberto Isaias, three dimensions should be considered separately: memory, purpose and execution.
Memory concerns how a donor wishes to be remembered.
Purpose defines the social, educational, cultural, environmental or other objective the donor wants to support.
Execution determines whether the legal documents, assets and beneficiary organization can actually convert that intention into usable charitable resources.
When all three are aligned, family members, nonprofit leaders, advisors and estate representatives have a clearer understanding of the plan.
When they are not, even a generous intention can become difficult to implement. A carefully written purpose may fail if the beneficiary is incorrectly identified. A technically valid legal structure can become disconnected from the donor’s values if the intended purpose was never clearly expressed.
The objective is to design an intention that can survive the person who created it.
Four ways a long-term charitable plan can break
The organization no longer exists
What happens: The document identifies only a specific institution that later closes or fundamentally changes.
Warning sign: No alternative is addressed and the underlying charitable purpose is unclear.
Risk reduction: Ask an estate-planning professional how applicable law can accommodate institutional change while preserving intent.
The restriction becomes impossible to fulfill
What happens: The gift may be used only for a narrowly defined program that no longer operates.
Warning sign: The restriction depends on a temporary program name, location or delivery model.
Risk reduction: Define the intended outcome clearly while considering reasonable future flexibility.
Documents point to different beneficiaries
What happens: A will states one intention while a contractual beneficiary form directs an asset somewhere else.
Warning sign: Accounts, trusts and wills were updated at different times without a coordinated review.
Risk reduction: Review the complete estate-planning system rather than each document independently.
The organization was never properly verified
What happens: The plan uses an incomplete name, identifies the wrong entity or assumes tax status.
Warning sign: There is no record of reviewing the EIN, TEOS information or relevant organizational documentation.
Risk reduction: Conduct due diligence when the plan is created and repeat it during future reviews.
The ten-signal durability test
Before treating a plan as complete, these ten questions can reveal weaknesses:
- Written purpose: Can the intended charitable outcome be explained in one or two sentences?
- Verified beneficiary: Is the correct legal organization identified?
- Documents coordinated: Do wills, trusts and beneficiary designations work together?
- Restrictions remain practical: Could the intended use reasonably continue over time?
- Contingency considered: Is there an appropriate response if the beneficiary materially changes?
- Relevant family members informed: Do the people who need to understand the intent actually understand it?
- Professional review completed: Have legal and tax issues been reviewed by qualified professionals?
- Future review scheduled: Is there a reason and date for reassessing the plan?
This reflects the central principle in Roberto Isaias’ approach: long-term charitable intent needs a verification process as well as conviction.
Frequently asked questions about charitable legacy planning
Continuity is designed before the documents are signed
Legacy giving becomes more durable when purpose, beneficiary and execution remain aligned even as circumstances evolve.
The $62.19 billion contributed through charitable bequests in the United States during 2025 demonstrates the scale of this part of American philanthropy. Yet the quality of an individual plan cannot be judged by size alone.
For Roberto Isaias, a more useful final question is: what should these resources continue making possible when the donor is no longer present to direct them?
A clear answer gives a charitable intention a better chance of becoming lasting action.
Sources
- Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy / Giving USA Foundation. “Giving USA: U.S. charitable giving rose to $617.20 billion in 2025, surpassing the $600 billion mark for the first time.” June 23, 2026.
Source - Internal Revenue Service. “About Form 706, United States Estate (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return.”
Source - Internal Revenue Service. “Instructions for Form 706.” September 2025 revision.
Source - Internal Revenue Service. “Tax Exempt Organization Search.”
Source - Internal Revenue Service. “Exempt organization public disclosure and availability requirements.” Updated July 3, 2026.
Source - American Bar Association. “Introduction to Wills.”
Source - American Bar Association. “The Probate Process.”
Source - National Council of Nonprofits. Amy Silver O’Leary. “Legacy Giving: Are Your Donors Waiting To Be Asked About Their Legacies?” April 14, 2021.
Source - Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy / DAFgiving360. “Next Generation donors’ charitable giving interests and approaches examined in new study.” January 29, 2025.
Source - Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy / Bank of America. “2025 Bank of America Study of Philanthropy.” September 30, 2025.
Source
