Youth and philanthropy: Legal issues, practical consequences

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR PHILANTHROPIC FUNDRAISING, NO. 38, WINTER 2002 © WILEY PERIODICALS, INC.

49

Incorporating youth as decision makers in a nonprofit organization presents certain legal ques-tions about their status, particularly if they serveon boards of directors.

4Youth and philanthropy: Legal issues,practical consequences

Paula Allen

SINCE THE LATE 1980s, great strides have been taken in involvingyouth in philanthropic activities, with at least two movements atthe forefront: youth grant making and service-learning. Today,thousands of young people volunteer through their schools andfaith-based and community-based organizations, and hundredsmore serve as grant makers through community foundations,United Ways, and programs like Youth as Resources (YAR, whosechapters nationwide encourage youth-led philanthropy and com-munity service projects).

Research undertaken by the INDEPENDENT SECTOR (1998) showsthat adults who participated in charitable activities when theywere young tend to volunteer and donate to charities at a signifi-cantly higher rate than those who did not. From this perspective,youth philanthropic activity should be part of any discussion ofadult fundraising, because it makes sense to educate and involveyoung people with one’s particular cause. As they grow and expandtheir personal financial resources, their knowledge of and past

50 ENGAGING YOUTH IN PHILANTHROPY

participation with community organizations will guide their inter-ests in community problem solving and giving.

“The fundamental change is yet to come,” says Steven Culbert-son, CEO of Youth Service America. “The experiences young peo-ple are gathering now mean that in the future, as they get older,we’re likely to see much more progressive and involved people inpositions of power” (Blum, 2000, pp. 1–2).

While adults have played a major role in providing opportuni-ties for youth to learn about and participate in volunteer activities,much of the increased interest in philanthropy is coming fromyouth themselves. Many young people are more knowledgeableabout social issues than their parents’ generation, in part becauseinformation is readily available on the Internet. As schools incor-porate service-learning into their curricula, classes help motivateyouth to become civically engaged and explore the community ontheir own. Community service requirements at some schools alsoboost local volunteerism and help educate students about commu-nity resources and needs, with the result that youth continue theirvolunteer participation after the required service ends. Programssuch as YAR, which support group volunteer projects with smallgrants, offer new ways for youth to make and interact with friends,heightening the appeal of volunteering.

“For the first time in the history of our country, we are lookingto kids starting at age 12 and 13 as real philanthropic assets in ourcommunities,” says Joel J. Orosz, former program director at theW. K. Kellogg Foundation (Blum, 2000, p. 1). The Kellogg Foun-dation has been a leader in encouraging youth philanthropy througha matching-grant program to community foundations in Michiganthat trains and involves teens in fundraising and grant making.

How are youth best engaged with voluntary organizations touse their skills and experiences, and what are the legal and politi-cal consequences of including youth in real positions of influ-ence—on governing boards and planning committees and infundraising and distribution? What are the consequences for thenonprofit world, as increasing numbers of youth are exposed tophilanthropy?

51LEGAL ISSUES

Involving youth in a meaningful wayMajor fundraising institutions have begun to realize the advantagesassociated with involving youth as resources in their organizations.Kendall, Lesko, and Radmer (2002) write,

Put simply, involving youth as equal partners is a new way of doing busi-ness for many United Ways. This philosophy means valuing and respect-ing young people beyond an intrinsic “future value” but as uniqueindividuals who can make important contributions today. . . .

Young people can be involved in all aspects of your United Way’s work.Young people can work alongside adults as campaign volunteers or loanedexecutives. They can serve as full members of vision councils, the cam-paign cabinet, citizen review teams, allocations panels, policy committees,or even the board of directors [p. 4].

United Way of Central Indiana realized the advantages of youthparticipation when it merged with YAR in 1993. The NationalCrime Prevention Council had piloted the YAR model in Indi-anapolis, Evansville, and Fort Wayne in 1987, and five years laterthe grant-making program had really taken off. YAR of CentralIndiana, which currently involves more than seventy teenagers asgrant makers in six counties, awards small grants for volunteer ser-vice projects designed and run by local youth groups. Youth proj-ect participants, ages eight through eighteen, come from diversesettings in urban, suburban, and rural environments, supported bysponsoring organizations like schools, scout troops, churches, andcorrectional institutions.

“The presence of youth on our boards reminds adult membersof the variety of perspectives that should be considered when mak-ing decisions about human care issues,” says Ellen Annala, CEO of United Way of Central Indiana. “Their ideas can enhance ser-vices and increase the impact United Way can have in central Indi-ana communities” (Youth to Serve on United Way’s CountyAdvisory Boards, 2002, p. 1). Indeed, program evaluations ofUnited Way of Central Indiana have demonstrated that YAR par-ticipants increase their awareness and knowledge of local problems


and helping organizations. In addition, youths’ problem-solvingskills are enhanced, and they are more likely to volunteer in thefuture. YAR participants become the kind of knowledgeable, com-passionate, and committed people whom the United Way hopes toengage as adults during its fundraising campaigns. In addition, theyouth grant makers, serving alongside adults on county boards,learn the intricacies of needs assessment, budgeting, allocations,and evaluation, the skills that United Way’s adult volunteers need.

Youth-adult partnerships can bring surprising, and wonderful,results. One example is in Marquette, Michigan, where young peo-ple clashed with police over the right to skateboard on downtownstreets. Many residents felt that youth were taking over the area;youth were angry because they felt their rights were being violatedwhen they were asked to leave. The Marquette City Commissionand the skateboarders set up a youth advisory board to help solvethe problem and encourage youth and adults to talk. What resultedwas a joint effort by the skateboarders and police officers to planand build a skateboard park.

In programs like YAR and Marquette’s youth advisory board, akey success factor is the true participation of youth. Youth who areinvited to serve on boards or advisory councils recognize tokenismand paternalism and respond by simply not participating. Whengiven the chance to offer real input, youth often surprise adults bytheir thoughtfulness and thoroughness.

In the national literature, several nonprofit organizations standout for the progress they have made in recognizing youth on theirboards of directors, including National 4-H, Camp Fire Boys andGirls, and YouthBuild USA. At the Web site of At the Table, anational organization promoting youth inclusion, 116 nonprofitorganizations are listed across the nation that involve youth asboard members, grant makers, project designers, planners, spokes-people, and evaluators.

Another example of youth decision making is the SistersEmpowering Sisters program, funded in Chicago by the Girl’s BestFriend Foundation. The program works with a small group of

53LEGAL ISSUES

teenage girls each year to teach them about grant making and mak-ing a difference in their communities. The girls study with foun-dation officials and complete a research project in an area of grantmaking that interests them. After their research is completed, thefoundation provides them with enough funds to award several smallgrants for the benefit of girls. During the process, the young grantmakers design their own request for proposals, review applications,and make grant decisions.

In 1994, students at a Florida private school established theirown community foundation. The Pine Crest Community Foun-dation, like other community foundations, raises money and awardsgrants; the difference from most other foundations is that its lead-ers are youth. The students had been challenged by a wealthyalumnus to raise money for local charities, which he promised tomatch. The youth met the challenge and then decided to createsomething more permanent. In their first four years, the youthraised $21,000, including $3,500 to help young hurricane victimsand $500 raised by the Spanish Club for aid to Hispanic children.Before dispensing grants, the students visited local charities andinterviewed leaders about their program activities and needs.

YAR, now a network of programs in twenty-three states and twoglobal sites, may have led the way in involving youth in grant mak-ing, but many such programs exist today. The Kellogg Foundationhas supported the Council of Michigan Foundations in creatingyouth endowments that provide funds allocated by young people.Close by in Kendallville, Indiana, the Dekko Foundation has annu-ally provided small groups of students with funds to distribute tocharities as they feel appropriate.

United Ways in Indiana, Florida, South Carolina, Texas, andelsewhere have established youth-run fundraising campaigns. Insome, high school students educate their peers about local chari-ties and hold United Way fundraising events in their classrooms.Youth may also be involved in all-youth panels to distribute thefunds they raised or on larger panels with adults to determine howdollars are allocated.


Is it legal?Incorporating youth as decision makers in a nonprofit organizationpresents certain legal questions about their status, particularly if theyserve on boards of directors. In seven states (Colorado, Florida, Geor-gia, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Utah), it is illegal forpeople under the age of eighteen to serve as voting members onboards of directors. Youth in these states may serve on boards in anonvoting capacity and may serve and vote on board subcommitteesand task forces. New York State law requires board members to beeighteen in most cases, but sixteen-year-olds may serve in certain edu-cational, youth development, or delinquency prevention programs.

Youth in Michigan and Minnesota can serve as voting membersof boards of directors with certain restrictions. In Michigan, youthmust be sixteen or seventeen years old, providing their numberdoes not exceed more than half of the total directors required fora quorum. In Minnesota, youth of any age may serve on boards,providing the majority of directors are at least eighteen years old.

In the remaining forty states and the District of Columbia, thelaw is silent on whether young people can legally serve as votingmembers. In these states, boards with youth members need to exer-cise care to prevent raising issues of liability, specifically in the areaof contract law. It is recommended that youth be required toabstain on votes involving contracts, particularly when the youthvote could influence the outcome of a contract decision.

An investigation into the legal question of whether minors mayserve on the boards of nonprofit agencies in Indiana produceduncertain results. Each state agency consulted—including the Officeof Senator Richard Lugar, the Department of Education, the Officeof the Attorney General, the Office of the Secretary of State, theProfessional Standards Board, the State Election Board, and theIndiana University Law School Library—gave an unofficial opinionon this legal question, and there was no uniformity of response.There was general agreement, however, that including youth onnonprofit boards presented risks. Only the Office of the Secretaryof State was able, after brief research, to provide a legal opinion.

55LEGAL ISSUES

According to Rebecca Longfellow, former counsel and deputydirector of the Corporate Division, Office of the Secretary of State,there are no qualifications for officers of nonprofit agencies exceptthose provided in the organizations’ articles of incorporation andbylaws. Unless prohibited by the bylaws, minors may serve on theboard of any nonprofit organization.

Even so, Longfellow thinks that youth on boards “make a weaklink” in that they cannot legally enter into any contracts until theyare eighteen years old.

Thus far, no one has undertaken a more extensive examinationof contract law and common law to look at what minors can andcannot do legally, as well as case research to see if anyone hasbrought suits against boards with underage members. At issue is towhat extent youth serving on a board have control of the vote.

Another issue is that some local youth organizations are char-tered through national organizations (for example, Boy Scouts). Insuch cases, an examination of the legal code in the state of originwould also be in order. In the case of Boy Scouts, their charter isthrough the state of Texas, which is less clear than Indiana regard-ing the legal status of youth on boards. (Although Texas is silent onyouth board membership, state law does require incorporators tobe eighteen years old.)

Board members of all ages receive some protection under lawsthat limit the liability of volunteers who are connected withnonprofit organizations. The measures protect volunteers from liability in cases where they are not personally negligent andprevent them from having to pay damages disproportional to theirresponsibility.

Even with a clear legal path for youth board membership, orga-nizations must check their bylaws for prohibitions to youth mem-bership. Taking the trouble to change the bylaws to include youngpeople sends a strong message to them that they are respected andvalued.

An additional consideration is the issue of parent or guardianconsent. Communicating with parents alleviates their concernsabout how their young person is spending his or her time and often


enlists their support in providing transportation or helping theirson or daughter schedule activities to accommodate their partici-pation with the organization. A standard consent form, along witha cover letter explaining the group’s mission, activities, and contactinformation, is advised.

An excellent resource in this area is Your Guide to Youth BoardInvolvement and the Law (2000), published by Youth on Board.

Benefits to organizations and to youthKaren Young, founder of Youth on Board, feels that charities“. . . are beginning to learn that including young people is a way tocome up with positive solutions to social issues, to get fresh ideas,and to use new energy and insight to tackle problems” (Blum, 2000,p. 2). Indeed, there are many advantages associated with includingyouth, particularly for youth-serving agencies:

• Youth involvement helps youth agencies design more relevantprograms and increase youth participation in those programs.

• Having youth participate sends a signal to outsiders thatan agency truly represents and supports the wishes of itsconstituents.

• Youth have important insights into specific issues, such as teendrug and alcohol abuse, and their knowledge, perspective, and col-lective interest are crucial resources in dealing with those issues.

• Having youth on the board brings the mission into the board-room and generates excitement and enthusiasm.

• Having youth participate gives them an increased voice in deci-sions that affect their lives, a stated goal of most youth develop-ment programs.

Other types of nonprofits also benefit from youth participation:

• Youth can fill gaps in the board and staff’s experiences andcontacts.

57LEGAL ISSUES

• Youth board members provide energy and a fresh perspectiveon how to accomplish tasks. For example, they have been knownto save organizations money through their ideas and actions. TheAnne Arundel County Board of Education in Annapolis, Maryland,has saved $100,000 annually thanks to the McGill Plan, namedafter a student board member who proposed modifying the schoolbus schedule during high school midterm and final exams. Stu-dents have served as voting members of their Board of Educationsince 1975.

• Youth can serve in important volunteer roles. Fifty-nine per-cent of young people between twelve and seventeen years of age vol-unteer (as compared to 44 percent of adults), and 60 percent of teensstart volunteering by the age of fourteen (INDEPENDENT SECTOR,2002). This is a huge pool that can expand the volunteer efforts oforganizations. Many older teens are experienced volunteers and arealso capable of recruiting and managing other volunteers.

• Organizations can develop new leadership and support for thefuture. As pointed out by the Activism 2000 Project, people underthe age of eighteen make up 26 percent of the population (Leskoand Tsourounis, 1998). Engaging this group now builds a strongbase for future leadership and for fundraising.

• Youth are a largely untapped new pool of potential donors.Teen spending alone was documented at $141 billion in 2000(Kendall, Lesko, and Radner, 2002), and 41 percent of teens con-tribute to charitable organizations (INDEPENDENT SECTOR, 2002).Exposure to philanthropic and service organizations, coupled withincreased disposable income, has the potential to redirect some teenincome toward charitable purposes now, as well as influence theirfuture donations.

Youth also have much to gain from their participation with vol-untary organizations:

• Experience in problem solving and in how institutions function.They observe and learn about people, strategy, competition, andnew technologies.


• Communication skills. In addition to learning how to sell theirideas, they learn team building, diplomacy, tact, and how to buildconsensus.

• Confidence and networking skills. They make contacts that canbe helpful in the job market as they grow and mature.

There are a few drawbacks to youth participation as well. Theteen years are an important developmental stage of life, and manynew experiences and activities vie for young people’s attention.Youth are relatively inexperienced when addressing legal, political,or policy questions. They may have difficulty articulating theirpoint of view in a mostly adult setting, particularly if a lone youth isserving on a board or committee. There are logistical challenges,such as needing rides to meetings. Some organizations, such assmall agencies without directors’ and officers’ liability insurancecoverage, may be concerned with legal liability.

Overcoming obstaclesResearchers at the University of Wisconsin in 2000 found thatadults and organizations experienced significant positive changeafter actively involving youth in decision-making roles. Althoughthis work identifies the need for more research to understand thenature and extent of the impact, experienced practitioners readilypoint out the benefits (some of which are listed above) and the hur-dles they had to overcome to make youth participation in their orga-nizations work. Barriers to success are both perceptual and logistical.

Perceptual barriers

• The perception that youth are lacking in intelligence or ability,and adults’ low expectations of their behavior.

• The perception that including youth in decision making means alot of extra work for staff and board.

• The perception that youth lack the ability to maintain confi-dentiality regarding board decisions and client information.

59LEGAL ISSUES

• The expectation that a few youth board members speak for theirentire age group.

• The perception of youth as lacking the capacity to raise funds onbehalf of the organization.

• The unwillingness by adults to give up some power in order toempower youth decision makers.

Logistical barriers

• The inflexibility of agency boards in altering time and setting toaccommodate potential youth members.

• The unwillingness of adults to translate the operational languageof their agencies for easy understanding by young people.

• Bylaws that impede the inclusion of youth membership and anunwillingness to change them.

• Lack of legal clarity.• Costs associated with including youth, such as staff time, train-

ing, revised materials, transportation, and food.• Poor recruitment strategy for including youth. Organizations

that pursue top student leaders may find them to be overcom-mitted elsewhere. Recruiting youth perceived as in need of helpis well intentioned but not effective. Youth, like adults, need tobe recruited and selected because of their talents, abilities, andnetworks.

• High turnover rate of youth as they move on to higher educa-tion and the need to replace them more frequently.

Youth participation surveyTo incorporate youth participants in decision making, structuresmay have to change, as well as attitudes and behaviors that havebecome entrenched. An informal look at seventeen organizationsserving youth in central Indiana provided some insight as to howorganizational culture affects success with including young people.

The seventeen youth-serving organizations that I surveyedincluded twelve that identified themselves as mission focused on


youth development, two on education, two on advocacy, and oneresidential treatment facility serving youth with emotional andbehavioral disorders. Although there was some variation in agesserved, all served youth in their teen years. Eight of the organiza-tions currently have youth serving on their boards of directors, infive cases as voting members. In all cases, agency CEOs wereinterviewed.

Fifteen of the seventeen organizations had discussed youth rep-resentation on their boards, and two of them were nearing a deci-sion about including youth. Some of the reasons given fordeciding not to include youth were that (1) youth are not matureenough to discuss sensitive issues, (2) youth would not maintainclient confidentiality, (3) youth would be too intimidated by theprocess to participate freely, and (4) the board was not the properplace for youth input.

Of the eight agencies that include youth board members, all hold their meetings at times when youth can attend, all invite youthto their board orientation sessions, and most provide trans-portation and food as needed. These organizations all rate theirboard culture as more supportive of youth than not, whereasthe nine organizations that do not have youth board membersprimarily rate their board culture as not supportive of youthparticipation.

There was a strong relationship between youth board participa-tion and CEO support. Figure 5.1 shows that twice as many CEOsfrom the youth-participating agencies strongly agree that youthinvolvement is essential to agency effectiveness. These CEOs arealso more likely to strongly agree that youth participation on theboard is a good idea, that youth would be interested in serving, andthat youth could afford the time to serve. In Figure 5.2, there is amarked difference in CEOs’ response to a question regardingyouths’ skills needed to deal with the complex issues of their orga-nizations. The CEOs who had youth on their boards, whether byfaith or experience, clearly show their belief that youth are capableof serving.

61LEGAL ISSUES

Figure 5.2. CEO response to, “Our youth clients lack the skillsneeded to deal with the complex issues of the organization”

Figure 5.1. CEO response to, “Youth involvement is essentialto the effectiveness of my agency”


The nine youth organizations without youth on their boardsstill find ways to collect youth input, primarily in the programdevelopment area. Several have their youth program participantscomplete periodic evaluations on the agencies’ services, and a cou-ple have youth advisory councils that plan volunteer and specialevents. At these agencies, however, youth do not sit at the tablewith adults.

Strategies for successOrganizations that have successfully incorporated youth as deci-sion makers have developed strategies to overcome some of thelogistical and perceived barriers to inclusion.

Youth on boards of directors

• Staff and board are willing to change their norms to commit toyouth representation.

• The executive and board leaders support youth representationand are willing to commit organizational resources to make itwork.

• The board incorporates youth participation in the mission state-ment, bylaws, and other documents. Youth representation is builtinto the nominating process, targeting youth for their individ-ual attributes and not their age. The board ensures that sufficientnumbers of youth are included not only on the board, but alsoon committees and in planning and evaluation activities.

• The board is flexible about meeting times and locations toaccommodate youth members and is willing to provide supportservices, such as transportation.

• Youth are trained in the basics of meeting procedure, boardroles, and responsibilities. Board manuals and other materials arerewritten at a basic level of literacy. Diversity training is providedto all members to promote cohesiveness.

• Many communities that offer community leadership trainingprograms for adults have begun to provide them for youth as

63LEGAL ISSUES

well. United Way of Central Indiana, for example, providestraining (including board training) to about twenty-five highschool students annually and then works to place them with localhealth and human service agencies.

Youth as grant makers

• The YAR model establishes a youth-adult partnership, withyouth and adults sharing equally all of the policy setting, plan-ning, and grant-making responsibilities. In this setting, youths’votes count fully, but adults are there to provide experience andto mentor youth through the process (Sazama and Young, 2001).

• Other models work successfully with separate panels of youthgrant makers, but with staff providing mentoring and support.Agency or foundation boards may have final approval, but theygenerally support the youths’ decisions.

There is not much evidence of fundraising activity by youthbeyond their participation in special events like school fundraisersor cookie sales. Some United Ways use youth volunteers to run stu-dent campaigns in their schools, in much the same way that adultsset up corporate campaigns, but this is not widespread. There areseveral examples of youth raising funds to match challenge grants.The youthful fundraisers at the Pine Crest Community Founda-tion appear to be real trendsetters in this area. For the most part,raising funds remains an adult activity.

Conclusions and recommendationsThe large number of recent publications on youth participation andthe number of Web sites that identify resources for organizationsthat are interested point to the probability that youth participationis here to stay. During the past fifteen years, organizations likeYouth as Resources, Community Partnerships with Youth, Youthon Board, Activism 2000 Project, and At the Table have ledthe youth voice movement, and many traditional youth-serving


agencies have joined the cause. Youth involvement has taken manyforms, as volunteers, donors, community problem solvers, and evenfounders of organizations. Equally noteworthy, studies show thatinvolvement as youth is a significant factor influencing how adultvolunteers and donors behave.

There is no uniformity of opinion regarding the legal issues sur-rounding youth participation as decision makers, fundraisers, andgrant makers. State laws differ, with the majority of states optingto remain silent on the issue of age. Even so, those in the field agreethat this kind of youth participation presents risks, and organiza-tions need to exercise care to avoid liability issues.

There is growing evidence that youth participation has resultedin significant positive changes for adults and for organizations inthe nonprofit sector. (This is in addition to the more obvious ben-efits that youth gain from their involvement with voluntary orga-nizations and causes.) As volunteers, youth are proving to bevaluable assets and resources through their giving of time and tal-ent. They are also an untapped donor pool, whose understandingof community issues and volunteer experiences will significantlyinfluence the giving choices and decisions they will make as adults.

Many excellent resources are available to help nonprofit organi-zations learn the best ways to incorporate youth into their decision-making environments. What remains is for adults to recognize thatyouth can be important resources for furthering organizational mis-sions, that youth have the time, energy, and vitality to make a dif-ference in organizational outcomes, and that an investment inyouth leadership increases the social capital that makes communi-ties flourish.

Is youth involvement with philanthropic organizations a trend,or is it becoming part of our philanthropic culture? What is thelocal and collective impact of youth-adult partnerships? Whatimpact does youth participation have on organizations over time?What factors are known to influence success across contexts?How does youth philanthropic activity fit into the larger field ofphilanthropy? There are many areas in this new field that wouldbenefit from further research and evaluation. Most notably, there

65LEGAL ISSUES

is little information available about youth involvement infundraising.

Recently, a joint effort by researchers at the University of Wis-consin and the Innovation Center for Community and YouthDevelopment identified six areas of potential research related toyouth involvement. Its report, Youth Involvement for Community,Organizational and Youth Development: Directions for Research,Evaluation and Practice (2002), highlights a series of questions gen-erated by a group of youth and adult researchers and practitioners.In recommending their research agenda, the authors declare thatit is essential that young people be involved in both design andimplementation.

In a recent issue of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, Eisenberg (2002)urges the nonprofit world “to do a better job of seeking out andattracting youth to its causes. . . . They are the pool of talent fromwhich future generations of leaders will have to come. But theyneed encouragement, applause, and support” (p. 64).

Young people have discovered the power of civic participation,and voluntary organizations are the better for it. Time will tellwhether youth participation is a passing trend or a permanent addi-tion to the philanthropic landscape.

ReferencesBlum, D. E. “High-School Senior and Peers Are a Growing Force for Phil-

anthropy.” Chronicle of Philanthropy, Jan. 13, 2000.Eisenberg, P. “Philanthropy Must Do More to Recognize the Young Who

Do Good.” Chronicle of Philanthropy, Apr. 18, 2002.INDEPENDENT SECTOR. “America’s Teenage Volunteers: Civic Participation

Begins Early in Life.” [www.independentsector.org] 1998.Kendall, A., Lesko, W., and Radmer, M. Youth as Equal Partners: A United

Way Guidebook on Youth Involvement. Alexandria, Va.: United Way ofAmerica, 2002.

Lesko, W. S., and Tsourounis, E. Youth! The 26 Percent Solution. Kensington,Md.: Activism 2000 Project, 1998.

Sazama, J., and Young, K. S. Your Guide to Youth Board Involvement and theLaw. Somerville, Mass.: Youth on Board, 2001.

University of Wisconsin and the Innovation Center for Community andYouth Development. Youth Involvement for Community, Organizational andYouth Development: Directions for Research, Evaluation and Practice. 2002.

Youth on Board. Your Guide to Youth Board Involvement and the Law.Somerville, Mass.: Youth on Board, 2000.

“Youth to Serve on United Way’s County Advisory Boards.” In Our Back-YARd, Spring–Summer 2002.

PAULA ALLEN directs the Youth as Resources program at United Way ofCentral Indiana.


Youth and philanthropy: Legal issues, practical consequences

Documents

Transcript of Youth and philanthropy: Legal issues, practical consequences