By Letícia Santos, Project Analyst at IDIS 

Building the future is an act of choice, and making choices requires naming what we want to change, having the courage to make public commitments, and being willing to engage in difficult conversations. These were the issues at the heart of the discussion between Nicholas Tedesco, President and CEO of National Center for Family Philanthropy (NCFP); Rodrigo Pipponzi, Member of the Social Impact Committee at RD Saúde and co-founder of Commitment 1%; and Michael França, Coordinator of the Racial Studies Center at Insper, during the closing panel of the 2026 Brazilian Philanthropy Forum, moderated by Paula Fabiani, CEO of IDIS. 

Nicholas Tedesco, President and CEO of National Center for Family Philanthropy (NCFP)

For Nicholas, representing family philanthropy, courage begins by questioning the motivation behind a philanthropic legacy. Drawing on his experience in contexts where a culture of giving is already well established, Nicholas notes that families give, but do not always ask why, for what purpose, or what they want to endure. 

Reimagining family philanthropy means creating space to question what should be preserved and what needs to change. Nicholas argues that we are in a period of transformation in which purpose must go hand in hand with current needs while anticipating those of the future. This means building governance structures that can sustain choices over time and creating conditions for different generations to come together around a common agenda. 

In the United States, Nicholas shared that many families have increasingly directed their support toward democracy and efforts to address the climate crisis, but he emphasized that this process requires conversations about power and privilege that the field still tends to avoid. 

In Brazil, the challenge comes earlier, as the involvement of wealthy families in philanthropy is still incipient and poorly documented, as highlighted in the report Paths to a Broader and More Strategic Action in Family Philanthropy in Brazil, produced by IDIS. According to data from the GIFE Census, in 2024, family foundations and institutes invested R$395 million, equivalent to approximately 7% of the total mapped by the census. 

Turning to the social role of businesses, Rodrigo Pipponzi focused his remarks on the courage to make public commitments and uphold them over time. RD Saúde chose not to create a separate institute, meaning that the company’s business mission and social commitment are treated as one and the same. This is reflected, for example, in allocating a percentage of net profit to social investment, as a signatory to Commitment 1%, a collaborative initiative between IDIS and Instituto MOL that seeks to encourage companies to donate to civil society organizations. 

Other ways the company has sought to align its business with its role in society include linking executive bonuses to ESG targets and involving senior leadership in the Social Impact Committee. Finally, Rodrigo emphasized that corporate philanthropy plays a catalytic role, with mobilization now being one of RD Saúde’s strengths. One example is the ‘round-up for charity’ initiative, which raises between R$4 million and R$5 million every year for civil society organizations in Brazil. 

Paula Fabiani, CEO at IDIS

Prompted by Paula Fabiani to discuss how inequality affects Brazilian society and the role of philanthropy in this context, Michael França, representing academia, brought questions to the table that the field rarely addresses in depth. Referring to his recently published book Os Custos das Desigualdades: uma carta às elites econômicas [The Costs of Inequalities: a letter to the economic elites], co-authored with Daniel Duque and published by Editora Jandaíra, Michael argued that in a society that is among the most unequal in the world, the externalities produced by inequality are not always sufficiently addressed, making it harder to break cycles of inequality and narrowing the range of possible futures. 

Reinventing philanthropy, in this sense, also means recognizing what it still fails to see. Michael spoke about his decision not to keep this knowledge confined to academic circles, instead bringing data and evidence into public debate and dialogue with governments. For philanthropy, he emphasizes that education alone cannot solve everything, and that transforming Brazilian society must extend beyond the walls of schools. 

The conversation that followed with the audience deepened critical aspects of the current debate, revealing that the questions raised by the three speakers resonated beyond the stage. The first question, about the role of philanthropy in the face of denialism, elicited complementary responses from Michael França and Nicholas Tedesco. Michael pointed to a structural asymmetry in philanthropy as a driver of knowledge production: international funding tends to place greater trust in researchers and provide long-term institutional support, while in Brazil, funding tends to be more restricted, geared toward confirming hypotheses and answering narrowly defined questions. Nicholas added, based on his experience in the United States, that universities are seen as reference centers for disseminating philanthropic best practices and developing leaders — a role that is still being consolidated in Brazil. 

The second question opened a discussion about collaboration among foundations, organizations, and smaller businesses. Nicholas said there is no magic formula, but that in the United States there is a growing recognition of the need to collaborate, even though some reluctance remains. For him, addressing the root causes of problems is only possible through systemic change, and systemic change requires collaboration. Pipponzi reinforced this argument from a business perspective, emphasizing that companies need to be willing to relinquish power and certain deeply held convictions in order to work together with communities and other actors, creating incentives for collaboration. 

Rodrigo Pipponzi, Member of the Social Impact Committee at RD Saúde

In their closing remarks, each speaker offered a synthesis that echoed the theme of the panel. Pipponzi emphasized that building the future we want requires the courage to make choices and sustain them over time. Michael proposed thinking about legacy as a way of reducing social distances, maintaining integrity between philanthropic and business roles. Nicholas concluded with an invitation to keep spaces like the Forum alive, so that conversations like this can remain open. 

Check ou the full panel: