HBCU Money

When Rivalries Do Nothing: What 50 Cent and T.I. Could Learn from Rockefeller and Carnegie

Posted on February 23, 2026 by hbcumoney | Leave a comment

As I grow older, I pay less attention to what men say. I just watch what they do. – Andrew Carnegie

In the late 19th century, two men stood at the pinnacle of American industry and despised each other. John D. Rockefeller, the oil baron who had quietly and methodically assembled Standard Oil into a monopoly, and Andrew Carnegie, the steel magnate who built his empire on the sweat and ingenuity of immigrant labor, were the defining rivals of the Gilded Age. They competed for wealth, for prestige, for the title of richest man in America — and then, crucially, they competed for something else entirely: legacy.

What that competition produced is almost too vast to comprehend.

Andrew Carnegie funded 2,509 libraries between 1883 and 1929, with 1,681 built in the United States alone. Over 26 primary organizations — including Carnegie Mellon University, Carnegie Hall, the Carnegie Institution for Science, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace — were established directly by him. Over 2,500 institutions and buildings worldwide bear his name. Pittsburgh, where his steel empire was born, holds the highest concentration, but the Carnegie name stretches across every state and dozens of countries. The Carnegie Corporation of New York, still active today, continues to fund education and democracy initiatives well into the 21st century.

The Rockefeller legacy is no less staggering. Dozens of major institutions bear his family’s name: Rockefeller University, The Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Center in the heart of Manhattan. His name is on halls at Cornell and Vassar, on a chapel at the University of Chicago, on an archive center that preserves the history of American philanthropy itself. And then there is the commercial legacy — when the Supreme Court broke up Standard Oil in 1911 into 34 companies, those companies eventually consolidated into what we now call ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Marathon Petroleum, and ConocoPhillips. That group of Standard Oil descendants today carries a combined market capitalization of approximately $1.3 trillion. The wealth Rockefeller created never stopped compounding. It simply changed form.

But here is what makes the Rockefeller legacy particularly resonant for this publication and this community: Morehouse College bears the name of Rockefeller’s former pastor, John Morehouse. Spelman College — the oldest historically Black college for women in the United States — bears the maiden name of Rockefeller’s wife, Laura Spelman. John D. Rockefeller was among Spelman’s earliest and most significant funders, contributing to the institution that would go on to educate generations of Black women who shaped American life. The man whose name is synonymous with monopoly capitalism was also, in a meaningful way, a patron of Black higher education at a moment when almost no one else was willing to be.

And the Rockefeller Foundation’s Form 990, publicly available through ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer, tells the ongoing story in hard numbers: total assets of $6.23 billion, net assets of $5.39 billion, and $440 million in charitable disbursements in 2023 alone — while the endowment principal remained largely intact. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, similarly available for public examination, reports total assets of $602 million and net assets of $559 million as of its most recent filing, up from $238 million in net assets just a decade ago. These institutions are still growing. They are still filing 990s. They are still deploying capital into the world more than a century after the men who created them drew their last breath.

A prior HBCU Money analysis of African American philanthropic institutions laid bare exactly why this distinction between revenue and investment income is the difference between activity and power. The King Center in Atlanta — one of the strongest African American legacy nonprofits in the country — earned $788,000 in investment income in 2022. The Ford Foundation generated $1.2 billion in investment income that same year. The Rockefeller Foundation generated $120 million. The Ford Foundation ran a $520 million deficit that year while the King Center ran a $1.28 million surplus — and Ford is the stronger institution by an almost incomprehensible margin. Ford can choose to run half a billion dollars in the red because its endowment is so vast that the deficit barely registers against the principal. The King Center’s surplus is a sign of precarity, not strength: it means the institution spent the year clinging to solvency rather than deploying capital into the world.

And then there is the Steward Family Foundation, anchored by David Steward — the wealthiest African American man in the country. In 2023 it reported $12.5 million in revenue. It held $22,000 in assets. It generated $29,000 in investment income. The wealthiest Black man in America has structured his primary philanthropic vehicle to distribute money annually and accumulate nothing — a pass-through, not a perpetual institution. His foundation will not be filing a 990 in a hundred years. It is not designed to. That is not a critique of David Steward’s generosity. It is a description of the architecture of Black philanthropy at its current upper limit: generous in the moment, invisible across generations.

That is what it looks like when a rivalry is pointed at something beyond ego.

Now enter Clifford Joseph Harris Jr. and Curtis James Jackson III, better known to the world as T.I. and 50 Cent.

The beef between these two hip-hop heavyweights has been simmering for years, recently reignited and escalating into a public spectacle that has captured the attention of the culture. T.I.’s son, King Harris, has leaped into the fray on his father’s behalf. Social media has lit up. Shots have been fired — verbal ones, though given the histories of both men, the word carries particular weight. The culture watches, chooses sides, and amplifies the conflict.

And what does it produce? Absolutely nothing of value to the African American community.

That is not an overstatement. It is the most precise accounting available.

This beef will not lead to a competition over who can build the largest endowment at an HBCU. It will not culminate in 50 Cent funding a new research center at Howard University while T.I. answers by endowing a chair at Morehouse — the school that, let us not forget, already carries the indirect legacy of a man who built an oil monopoly. It will not inspire either man to deposit millions into African American-owned banks, institutions that are chronically undercapitalized and desperately in need of the kind of support that Black wealth could provide if it were directed with intention. It will not produce a dollar for African American early childhood education programs. It will not fund K-12 institutions in the underserved communities both men came from. It will not build a single research facility dedicated to attacking the health disparities — hypertension, diabetes, maternal mortality, cancer survival rates — that continue to devastate Black America at disproportionate rates.

It will do nothing. It will generate content. It will generate clout. It will generate revenue for platforms that profit from conflict. It will generate nothing else.

The Medgar and Myrlie Evers Institute — honoring the NAACP field secretary who was assassinated in his own driveway in 1963 and the woman who spent thirty years pursuing his killer to justice — reported just $107,000 in total revenue in 2023 and earned nothing in investment income. Nothing. The institution charged with preserving the legacy of one of the most consequential civil rights martyrs in American history is running on the institutional equivalent of fumes. The Martin and Coretta King Center in Atlanta, the steward of Dr. King’s legacy and one of the most visited civil rights landmarks in the country, earned $788,000 in investment income in 2022 against an endowment that remains a fraction of what the institution’s mission demands. The Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial and Educational Center in New York — preserving the legacy of a man who came from the same streets, the same circumstances, the same defiance of a system designed to destroy him that both T.I. and 50 Cent have built careers channeling — generated $1,500 in investment income on $1.4 million in total revenue. Fifteen hundred dollars. Two men who have each earned more than that in the time it takes to read this sentence have not made these institutions whole.

This is the specific, named, documented cost of Black celebrity beef. Not an abstraction. Not a metaphor. Three institutions. Three legacies. Three sets of numbers that should make every wealthy Black American in this country uncomfortable.

This is not an indictment of either man as human beings. Both T.I. and 50 Cent have done genuine good in their communities at various points in their careers. Both are extraordinarily successful businessmen who built empires from circumstances that did not favor them. The fact that they arrived at wealth and influence from the bottom of American society makes their success stories genuinely remarkable. That is precisely why the waste of it is so tragic.

Consider the arithmetic of Carnegie’s library program alone. Two thousand five hundred libraries. Built over 46 years. In communities across the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, South Africa, and beyond. Free public libraries, at a time when access to books was a privilege of the wealthy. Carnegie gave away approximately $350 million during his lifetime — roughly $6 billion in today’s dollars — and the institutions he funded are still operating, still serving the public, still bearing his name. The competition between Carnegie and Rockefeller over who could give more, who could build more, who could leave the more lasting mark did not diminish either man’s wealth in any meaningful sense. It simply ensured that their names — and more importantly, the institutions those names represent — would outlast them by centuries.

There is a version of the T.I. and 50 Cent rivalry that could be genuinely historic. Imagine if these two men, instead of trading barbs online, announced a ten-year competition — tracked publicly, adjudicated by the community — over who could deploy their wealth most effectively for Black institutional development. Imagine 50 Cent challenging T.I. to match him dollar for dollar in deposits to Black-owned banks. Imagine T.I. responding by pledging to fund early childhood education centers in Atlanta and daring 50 to do the same in New York. Imagine the cultural energy that currently flows into this beef redirected into a genuine rivalry over who could build more, endow more, fund more, create more for a community that gave both of them everything they needed to become who they are.

The HBCU endowment gap is the starkest measure of the opportunity being squandered — and the universities that Rockefeller and Carnegie personally founded make the disparity almost impossible to look at directly.

Rockefeller founded the University of Chicago. As of June 30, 2025, its endowment stood at $10.9 billion, having returned 10.2% on investments in a single fiscal year. Carnegie founded Carnegie Mellon University. Its endowment reached $3.48 billion as of that same date, with a 10.9% net investment return for the year. Together, those two universities — founded by two men who were rivals — hold endowments exceeding $14 billion.

The combined endowments of all 100 HBCUs do not reach $6 billion. Two universities, founded by two rivals more than a century ago, hold nearly three times the endowment wealth of every HBCU in America combined.

Read that again. Two schools. Three times the endowment of one hundred.

That is not a funding gap. That is a structural chasm, built over generations, that determines whose scholars get paid, whose research gets funded, whose students graduate without debt, and whose institutions survive economic downturns without crisis. The University of Chicago and Carnegie Mellon will never face an existential budget crisis. They will never have to choose between keeping the lights on and retaining faculty. Their endowments generate enough annual return to fund operations, scholarships, and research without ever touching the principal. Meanwhile, HBCUs operate on margins that would make most community colleges uncomfortable, sustained by the dedication of their communities and the faith that the work matters — because the money has never matched the mission.

That is not a condemnation of HBCUs. It is a condemnation of the conditions under which they have been forced to operate, and an indictment of the Black wealth that has not yet organized itself to close that gap. The model for what organized private wealth can do exists and is documented in publicly filed 990s and university endowment reports. The only missing ingredient is the will to compete for something that matters.

The research funding gap is, if anything, even more consequential than the endowment gap — because research is where the future is written.

According to the National Science Foundation’s Higher Education Research and Development survey, the top 20 predominantly white institutions combined spend $36.5 billion annually on research and development. The top 20 HBCUs combined spend $712 million. That is not a gap. That is a ratio of more than 51 to 1. And to make the disparity even more concrete: 52 individual PWIs each spend more on R&D by themselves than all 20 of the top HBCU research institutions combined. Fifty-two schools. Each one, alone, outspending the entire upper tier of Black higher education research.

This is where the consequences of underfunding stop being abstract. Research funding determines who gets to ask the questions that shape medicine, technology, public policy, and economic development. It determines whose communities get studied, whose health outcomes get investigated, whose diseases get treated, whose neighborhoods get the infrastructure investments that flow from university-anchored economic development. When HBCUs are systematically excluded from this resource base, the African American community is not simply being denied prestige. It is being denied the scientific and institutional capacity to solve its own problems on its own terms.

The $35.8 billion annual research gap between the top 20 PWIs and the top 20 HBCUs is the price the African American community pays, every single year, for the failure to build research endowments at Black institutions. It is a recurring tax on Black intellectual capacity, levied not by law but by the absence of the kind of sustained private philanthropic investment that Rockefeller directed toward the University of Chicago and Carnegie directed toward Carnegie Mellon. Those institutions now have the endowments to fund research independence for generations. HBCUs are still waiting for someone to care enough to start.

The health dimension of this research gap is where the stakes become most personal. Black Americans die younger, suffer more chronically, and receive worse care at nearly every point of contact with the American medical system. Maternal mortality, hypertension, diabetes, cancer survival rates — the disparities are not mysteries. They are the predictable output of a research infrastructure that has never been adequately funded to study, understand, and treat Black patients on their own terms, in their own communities, with their own trust. The research capacity to change that exists at HBCUs and affiliated medical schools — institutions with the community relationships and patient access that predominantly white research universities have spent decades failing to build. But research capacity without research funding is just potential. Private endowments directed at HBCU medical research would save lives in ways that are measurable, documentable, and permanent. That is not a metaphor. It is a clinical fact.

African American-owned banks need the same intentional capital. Black-owned financial institutions are among the most important and most neglected infrastructure in the African American community. They survive on thin margins in the communities that need them most, while billions of dollars of Black wealth sit in institutions that have never demonstrated meaningful commitment to Black economic development. A public competition between two of the most influential men in Black popular culture over who could move more capital into Black banks would do more for Black economic infrastructure than a decade of policy advocacy.

None of this will happen because of the current beef between T.I. and 50 Cent. The cultural energy, the attention, the platform — all of it is being spent on a conflict that produces nothing, files no 990, builds no endowment, funds no scholar, saves no life.

Carnegie built 2,509 libraries. Rockefeller’s philanthropic descendants are still disbursing hundreds of millions of dollars annually, more than a century after his death, at institutions that carry his family’s name — including two HBCUs that bear the names of his pastor and his wife. The companies that descended from his oil trust are worth $1.3 trillion today. The two universities those rivals founded — the University of Chicago and Carnegie Mellon — together hold $14 billion in endowments and anchor research enterprises that collectively dwarf the entire HBCU research sector. Fifty-two individual predominantly white institutions each spend more on research annually than every top HBCU combined. The legacy of that Gilded Age rivalry is written in stone and endowment and laboratory and policy across the American landscape, in ways that will persist for another century at minimum.

What will the legacy of this beef be? Nothing. A few viral moments. A news cycle. A cultural footnote.

The competition that actually matters — the one that could put Black institutions on financial footing that no future political administration could threaten, that could fund the scholars and researchers and early childhood programs and community banks that the African American community has been building toward for generations — that competition has not yet begun.

It could begin tomorrow. The Medgar and Myrlie Evers Institute needs an endowment. The Martin and Coretta King Center needs an endowment. The Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial and Educational Center needs an endowment. Dozens of HBCUs need endowments. Scores of African American nonprofits are running on annual donations and faith while the institutions that honor the people who bled and died for the freedom that made Black celebrity possible in the first place operate on budgets that would embarrass a mid-size law firm. A rivalry over who could change that — who could move first, who could give more, who could build something that files a 990 a hundred years from now — would be worth watching. It would be worth celebrating. It would be worth the cultural energy that is currently being fed into nothing.

It is waiting for two men, or any two men, to decide that legacy is more interesting than drama.

The 990 filings are ready to be written. The institutions are ready to be named. Morehouse and Spelman proved more than a century ago that an industrialist’s rivalry could, when channeled correctly, leave Black institutions standing long after the industrialist was gone.

The only question now is who in this generation is willing to compete for something that will still matter when they are gone.

Leave a comment

Posted in Editorial

Tagged African American institutional wealth, african american nonprofits, Andrew Carnegie legacy, Black celebrity wealth, Black higher education funding, black owned banks, black philanthropy, HBCU endowment gap, HBCU research funding, investment income Black institutions, John D. Rockefeller legacy, King Center endowment, Malcolm Shabazz Center, Medgar Evers Institute, Morehouse College history, NSF HERD data, Rockefeller Carnegie rivalry, Spelman College history, T.I. 50 Cent beef

From Four to Fifty: Rebuilding Black Boarding Schools and Day Schools for STEM Dominance

Posted on February 20, 2026 by hbcumoney | Leave a comment

I have discovered few learning disabled students in my three decades of teaching. I have, however, discovered many, many victims of teaching inabilities. – Marva Collins

When the Eight Schools Association, comprising Phillips Exeter, Phillips Andover, Choate Rosemary Hall, and other elite boarding schools, sends delegations to the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair or MATHCOUNTS Championships, they arrive with institutional power behind them. Generations of alumni networks, endowments in the hundreds of millions, dedicated competition coaches, and a culture that expects excellence. These schools don’t just prepare students for competitions; they’ve built entire ecosystems that produce winners systematically.

The African American community needs the same—not to gain access to their institutions, but to build our own parallel ecosystem of excellence. This isn’t about integration into existing structures; it’s about developing Black-controlled educational institutions that create seamless pipelines from kindergarten through college, from HBCU undergraduate research to Black-owned businesses and laboratories. It’s about institutional sovereignty and generational wealth-building through education.

The infrastructure already exists in fragments: four remaining historic Black boarding schools fighting for survival, HBCU laboratory schools serving thousands of students on HBCU campuses, scattered private Black schools across the nation, and 101 HBCUs waiting to receive the next generation of Black scholars. What’s missing is the connective tissue—the strategic vision to link these institutions into a powerhouse network that rivals anything the Eight Schools Association offers, while recognizing that most Black families need day school options, not just boarding programs.

African American students’ underrepresentation in elite STEM competitions—Science Olympiad, USA Biology Olympiad, American Computer Science League, Conrad Challenge isn’t a talent problem. It’s an institutional problem. When majority-Black schools face closure rates nearly double that of other schools nationwide, according to Stanford research, competition programming becomes an afterthought, if it exists at all. Meanwhile, prestigious institutions treat competition success as institutional mandate. They hire Ph.D.-level coaches, fund unlimited travel to regional and national contests, maintain state-of-the-art laboratories and makerspaces, and celebrate academic victories with the same fervor as athletic championships. Most importantly, they’ve built alumni networks spanning decades that provide mentorship, internships, and career pathways for graduates.

The Eight Schools Association demonstrates what institutional coordination achieves. These schools share best practices, collaborate on programming, and maintain standards of excellence that elevate all members. Their graduates don’t just attend elite colleges; they create companies, endow professorships, and return resources to strengthen the institutions that launched them. African Americans need this same institutional architecture but built for us, by us, serving our community’s interests and priorities.

While boarding schools capture attention with their prestige and immersive environments, the reality is that most Black families want and need high-quality day schools. Boarding schools serve grades 9-12 and require families to send children away, a proposition that doesn’t align with many Black family structures, cultural values, or financial realities. The future of Black educational excellence must therefore be built on a foundation of elite private day schools serving Pre-K through 12, supplemented by strategic boarding school options for families who choose that path.

Only four historic African American boarding schools remain from the over 100 that once existed: The Piney Woods School in Mississippi, Laurinburg Institute in North Carolina, Pine Forge Academy in Pennsylvania, and Redemption Christian Academy in upstate New York. These institutions represent more than educational options—they embody Black self-determination in education. The decline from over 100 to just four is a catastrophic loss of Black educational infrastructure that demands urgent reversal. But the primary focus must be on establishing a network of at least fifty elite Black private day schools across the country within the next decade, complemented by fifteen boarding schools for families seeking that option. Together, these institutions would create a comprehensive ecosystem serving Pre-K through grade 12, explicitly designed to rival the Eight Schools Association and other elite networks in resources, reputation, and results.

The day school model solves multiple practical challenges. Families maintain daily contact with their children while accessing elite education. Schools can serve Pre-K through 12, creating 14-year pipelines instead of just four years. Geographic coverage can be broader, with schools in major metropolitan areas where Black families are concentrated. And costs per student are lower than boarding, making sustainability more achievable.

Each elite Black private day school in the network would be designed as a competition powerhouse from the ground up. This means recruiting PhD-level faculty and competition coaches—the same caliber of talent that elite institutions employ. Science programs need teachers with doctoral degrees who’ve conducted research and understand how to prepare students for Olympiad-level competition. Mathematics departments require faculty who’ve published in their fields and can coach students to MATHCOUNTS and AMC excellence. Computer science programs need instructors with both academic credentials and industry experience who can lead programming teams to national prominence.

The Eight Schools Association succeeds because they pay top dollar for elite talent. Black private schools must do the same, offering competitive salaries that attract the best minds to teach our students. This isn’t optional it’s the price of competing at the highest levels. A well-meaning teacher with a bachelor’s degree cannot compete against PhD coaches at elite institutions. We must match their investment in human capital.

Beyond faculty, these schools require world-class infrastructure. State-of-the-art science laboratories where students can conduct genuine research. Extensive libraries with digital and physical resources rivaling small colleges. Advanced makerspaces with 3D printers, laser cutters, and robotics equipment. Computer labs with the latest technology. Athletic facilities that support both physical education and competitive sports. These facilities cannot be afterthoughts they must be built from the beginning to match or exceed what elite independent schools offer.

These schools must be strategically distributed across the country, not hostage to HBCU locations. Major metropolitan areas with significant Black populations need multiple options. Atlanta should have at least three elite Black private day schools. The DMV area (D.C., Maryland, Virginia) needs at least four. Houston, Dallas, Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, Memphis, Charlotte—each requires multiple institutions to serve their communities adequately. But the network must also extend to underserved regions. New Mexico, Maine, the Pacific Northwest, Montana—areas with smaller but growing Black populations deserve options beyond traditional centers. These schools serve dual purposes: providing excellent education to local Black families and attracting families willing to relocate for access to elite Black institutions.

Boarding schools, given their residential nature and focus on high school, can be even more geographically flexible. A boarding school in rural Vermont or coastal Oregon can draw students nationally, serving families across the country who choose that educational model for grades 9-12.

Each school—whether day or boarding—should partner with one or more HBCUs through strategic regional arrangements. For instance, Atlanta’s day schools could partner with Spelman, Morehouse, Clark Atlanta, and Morris Brown. A boarding school in Texas could be triangulated between Prairie View A&M, Texas Southern, Grambling, and Southern University, with all four institutions sharing governance and pipeline responsibilities.

This distributed partnership model offers several advantages. HBCU faculty from multiple institutions would serve on academic boards, bringing diverse expertise while ensuring curriculum rigor and alignment with college expectations. Students would have guaranteed pathways to any partner HBCU, expanding their options beyond a single institution. College students from partner HBCUs could supplement as residential advisors and tutors, gaining education experience while strengthening connections between institutions.

However, to truly compete with the Eight Schools Association, these boarding schools must recruit PhD-level faculty and coaches—the same caliber of talent that elite institutions employ. Science competition teams need coaches with doctoral degrees in their fields, not just enthusiasm. Mathematics programs require faculty who’ve published research and understand competition mathematics at the highest levels. Computer science teams need instructors with industry and academic credentials. The Eight Schools Association succeeds because they pay top dollar for elite talent; Black boarding schools must do the same, offering competitive salaries that attract the best minds to teach and coach our students.

These K-12 institutions cannot be dependent on HBCU facilities or resources. To truly compete with elite independent schools, they must build and maintain their own infrastructure and secure their own endowments. Each elite day school should target minimum endowments of $50-100 million. Each boarding school should aim for $100-200 million. These endowments ensure financial sustainability, enable need-blind admissions, support competitive faculty salaries, and provide unlimited resources for student opportunities. HBCU partnerships provide crucial academic connections and pipeline benefits, but the K-12 institutions themselves must stand as independently powerful schools capable of competing with the best in America.

For this ecosystem to succeed, competition excellence cannot be an extracurricular afterthought—it must be embedded in institutional DNA from day one. Every school in the network should mandate that students participate in at least one major STEM competition annually. This normalization is critical. When competition participation becomes expected rather than exceptional, students prepare differently, families support differently, and results follow.

Consider what this looks like in practice at an elite Black day school serving Pre-K through 12. Elementary students (grades 3-5) participate in regional Science Olympiad divisions, Math Kangaroo, and Lego robotics competitions. Middle schoolers (grades 6-8) compete in MATHCOUNTS, Science Bowl, National History Day, and American Computer Science League. High schoolers (grades 9-12) engage in USA Biology Olympiad, Chemistry Olympiad, Physics Olympiad, Congressional Debate, Model UN, and Intel Science Fair. Every student finds competitions aligned with their interests and abilities. The school’s culture celebrates competition success publicly and prominently—trophies in display cases, assemblies honoring winners, media coverage of achievements. Academic competition excellence becomes as central to institutional identity as athletics at traditional schools.

The network should also establish its own internal competitions. An annual Black Excellence Science Olympiad. A Black School Network MATHCOUNTS Championship. Computer science competitions exclusively for students in the pipeline. These internal competitions provide practice grounds while building institutional identity and healthy rivalry that elevates performance across all schools.

HBCU laboratory schools—at institutions like Alabama State University (which pioneered the model in 1920), Southern University, Florida A&M, Howard University, and North Carolina A&T—serve crucial roles in this ecosystem. Virginia’s recent incorporation of laboratory schools at Virginia Union University and Virginia State University shows continued commitment to the model. These schools can serve as proof-of-concept institutions, demonstrating what’s possible when Black schools receive adequate resources and maintain rigorous competition programming. Their success provides templates for independent day schools to replicate. A laboratory school that sends students to national Science Olympiad championships proves the model works; independent schools can study their methods and adapt them.

Laboratory schools should also function as regional hubs, establishing partnerships with at least five majority-Black schools in their areas. They share competition resources, coaching expertise, and best practices, elevating the entire region’s performance while identifying top talent. Southern University Lab School partners with New Orleans-area Black schools. FAMU’s developmental research school does the same in Florida. Howard Middle School anchors D.C.-area networks. This hub-and-spoke model accelerates ecosystem development beyond the schools the network directly controls. Within five years, hundreds of majority-Black schools have competition programming that didn’t exist before, creating a rising tide that lifts all boats.

None of this happens without resources, and HBCU alumni must lead the investment. Every HBCU has thousands of successful graduates—doctors, engineers, lawyers, business owners—who could fund this institutional development. The goal isn’t charity but investment in infrastructure that strengthens the entire Black community. Alumni funding priorities should include capitalizing day school construction in major metropolitan areas nationwide, establishing minimum $50-100 million endowments for each day school to ensure sustainability, endowing boarding school scholarships so talented students can attend regardless of family income, funding PhD-level faculty recruitment with competitive salary packages, constructing world-class facilities—laboratories, libraries, makerspaces, athletic complexes—that rival elite independent schools, and creating venture capital funds that support businesses founded by network graduates.

The Eight Schools Association’s power derives largely from alumni commitment. Exeter’s endowment exceeds $1.5 billion. Andover’s tops $1.3 billion. These resources enable need-blind admission, world-class faculty recruitment, and unlimited opportunities for students. Black schools need similar commitments scaled appropriately. What if Spelman and Morehouse alumni collectively committed $200 million to establish three elite Black day schools in Atlanta? What if Howard University graduates funded two D.C.-area day schools with combined endowments of $150 million? These numbers are achievable when alumni understand they’re not donating to charity but investing in institutional power that will serve generations.

Regional alumni coalitions should form specifically to capitalize schools in their areas. The Texas HBCU Alumni Coalition funds schools in Houston and Dallas. The Midwest HBCU Coalition establishes schools in Chicago and Detroit. The Southeast Coalition covers Atlanta, Charlotte, and Memphis. This regional approach creates ownership and ensures schools reflect their communities’ needs.

While building new elite institutions is essential, the network must also elevate existing Black private schools and support majority-Black public schools in developing competition cultures. Not every Black school can or should become a boarding institution, but every Black school can raise its educational rigor and competition participation. The network should establish a tiered certification system. Tier One schools meet the highest standards—PhD faculty, comprehensive competition programming, world-class facilities, and proven track records of sending students to top competitions and HBCUs as elite scholars. Tier Two schools are developing toward these standards with network support. Tier Three schools are beginning the journey, receiving mentorship and resources from established institutions.

This certification creates aspirational goals while providing roadmaps for schools at different development stages. A small Black private school in Birmingham might begin as Tier Three, receiving coaching expertise and competition funding from the network. Within five years, they achieve Tier Two status. Within a decade, they’re Tier One, competing nationally and serving as a regional hub themselves. The network succeeds not only by building new schools but by elevating all Black schools toward excellence. Every student in a majority-Black school—whether public, private, or laboratory school—should have access to competition programming, rigorous academics, and pathways to HBCUs and beyond.

The ultimate goal transcends competition trophies and college admissions. This ecosystem should produce a generation of Black scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs who build institutions, create wealth, and invest back into the network that developed them. A student who attends an elite Black day school from Pre-K through 12, earns a degree from an HBCU, and then receives seed funding from the network’s venture capital arm to launch a tech company—that’s the full pipeline. Ten years later, that founder endows scholarships at their alma maters and hires exclusively from the network. This is how generational wealth builds and how communities transform economically.

The competition focus matters because STEM competitions lead to STEM careers, which offer the highest salaries and most secure employment in the American economy. But the jobs aren’t enough. The network must produce business owners, not just employees. Laboratory directors, not just lab technicians. University presidents, not just professors. The institutional ecosystem must aim for complete economic sovereignty. Black-owned research laboratories should hire preferentially from network schools. Black engineering firms should recruit from HBCU programs fed by network pipelines. Black investment funds should capitalize businesses founded by network graduates. This closed-loop system ensures wealth circulates within the Black community, building generational prosperity.

The vision is clear, but visions don’t implement themselves. This ecosystem requires institutional leadership with the authority, resources, and commitment to coordinate across decades. The answer must be a new entity—a Black Educational Excellence Consortium governed by a coalition of HBCU presidents, major HBCU alumni association leaders, Black philanthropists, and representatives from the four remaining boarding schools. This consortium would function similarly to how the Eight Schools Association coordinates among its members, but with broader scope covering day schools, boarding schools, and laboratory schools.

The consortium’s core responsibilities would include establishing and enforcing network standards and the tiered certification system, coordinating capital campaigns and alumni fundraising across regions, recruiting and vetting PhD-level faculty and leadership for new schools, managing the network-wide competition circuit and celebrating achievements, administering the venture capital fund for graduate entrepreneurs, ensuring HBCU partnership agreements are formalized and beneficial to all parties, and providing technical assistance to schools at all development tiers.

This consortium cannot be housed within a single HBCU—it must be an independent 501(c)(3) with its own board, staff, and budget. However, HBCUs should hold majority governance positions, ensuring the pipeline serves their institutional interests. Initial capitalization of the consortium itself would require $25-50 million to establish offices, hire expert staff, and begin coordinating the network’s development. Regional chapters of the consortium would operate in major areas—the Southeast Chapter, Texas Chapter, Midwest Chapter, West Coast Chapter—each responsible for school development in their territories. These chapters would be staffed by education experts, fundraisers, and facilities planners who understand both K-12 education and HBCU pipelines. The consortium model solves the coordination problem. Without it, well-meaning but disconnected efforts will struggle. With it, alumni know where to direct resources, new schools follow proven models, and the ecosystem develops strategically rather than haphazardly.

With leadership structure established, building this ecosystem requires coordinated action across a decade. Year one should focus on stabilizing and expanding the four remaining Black boarding schools with immediate capital infusions, launching five elite Black day schools in major metropolitan areas with full capitalization and endowments, and establishing formal partnerships between all K-12 institutions and nearby HBCUs. Year two should expand competition programming at all HBCU laboratory schools with PhD-level coaching staffs, launch ten additional elite day schools in strategic regions nationwide, and create the first network-wide competition circuit exclusively for member institutions.

By year three, the network should establish tiered certification for all participating Black schools, regardless of founding date, launch the first network venture capital fund for graduate entrepreneurs, and open five new boarding schools in geographically diverse locations. Year four should scale to thirty total elite day schools and ten boarding schools, establish PhD faculty recruitment pipelines specifically for network schools, and create comprehensive summer programs where students from all network schools can access intensive competition preparation. Finally, year five should see the graduation of the first full cohorts who experienced elementary through high school entirely within network institutions, the achievement of national competition championships by multiple network schools, and network endowments exceeding $2 billion collectively across all institutions.

Within a decade, this network produces tens of thousands of Black students annually receiving world-class education, wins national competition championships regularly, feeds HBCUs with exceptionally prepared students, and becomes self-sustaining through graduate giving and economic activity. The Eight Schools Association took over a century to build their institutional power. With strategic focus and adequate resources, the Black K-12-to-HBCU pipeline can achieve comparable influence in a fraction of that time.

The civil rights movement fought for integration, and those battles were necessary. But sixty years later, the results are mixed. Majority-Black schools face disproportionate closure. Black students in predominantly white institutions navigate isolation and microaggressions. The promise that integration would provide equal access has proven incomplete. The path forward isn’t abandoning integration but building powerful alternatives—Black-controlled institutions that offer excellence on our terms. When the Eight Schools Association sets standards, they do so for their community’s benefit. When they build pipelines to Ivy League schools, they’re securing their children’s futures. African Americans deserve the same institutional sovereignty.

This ecosystem—day schools, boarding schools, laboratory schools, HBCUs, research labs, businesses—creates options. A Black student should be able to receive world-class education from Pre-K through doctoral degree entirely within Black institutions, if they choose. That choice currently doesn’t exist at scale. Building it is the work. The competition focus is merely the entry point—a measurable goal that drives institutional development. But the vision extends far beyond Science Olympiad trophies. It’s about creating an ecosystem where Black excellence is systematically produced, celebrated, and leveraged to build generational wealth and institutional power.

Our children deserve day schools and boarding schools as prestigious as Exeter and Andover—schools that are ours. They deserve laboratory schools as innovative as the most progressive independent schools—schools that feed into our universities. They deserve competition networks as robust as any in America—networks that celebrate Black achievement unapologetically. The infrastructure exists in fragments. The model is proven. What’s required now is collective commitment—alumni investment, HBCU leadership, and community support to build an ecosystem of Black educational excellence that rivals any in the world. Not for integration into existing power structures, but to establish our own. Not just for high school, but from the earliest years through college and career. Not just for the few who can access boarding schools, but for the many who need excellent day schools in their communities. The time for this work is now. The resources exist. The need is urgent. Let’s build.

Leave a comment

Posted in Lifestyle

Tagged African American boarding schools, african american education, black boarding schools, Black educational excellence, Black K-12 education, Black private schools, Black school funding, Black student achievement, black wealth building, educational equity, educational sovereignty, elite Black schools, hbcu alumni, HBCU laboratory schools, HBCU pipeline, HBCU schools, historically black colleges, school competition programs, STEM competitions for Black students, STEM education for minorities

HBCU Money’s 2025 Top 10 HBCU Endowments

Posted on February 17, 2026 by hbcumoney | Leave a comment

Note: These data are based on colleges, universities, affiliated foundations, and related nonprofit organizations that volunteered to participate in NACUBO’s endowment study series.

A year after Howard University became the first HBCU to break the $1 billion endowment value mark, four other HBCUs have reached the $100 million mark. It is a complicated celebration when the NACUBO report shows 89 PWIs who have at least $2 billion in endowment value. A few notable HBCUs who reported last year like Morehouse College, North Carolina A&T and Meharry Medical College who have been regular NACUBO participants, are all absent from this year’s list. An HBCU favorite, the University of Virgin Islands returned after an absence in 2024. The reality on the ground with the looming crisis in admissions is for most HBCUs, $500 million is the endowment floor and only two HBCUs (Howard and Spelman) are above that mark. With not as many students graduating K-12, that means HBCUs who are heavily reliant on tuition revenue will see acute strains in the coming decade. It is not a matter of if, but when. Strong endowments are often the only thing that can see institutions through times of stress. That currently includes political stress that all colleges and universities are facing as it relates to state and federal funding. The lack of urgency among HBCU alumni continues to be concerning. Many HBCU alumni think their institution is in better financial shape than it is with no real landscape of higher education economics and the factors that create vulnerability. Using HBCU Alumni Associations and Chapters as more aggressive investment vehicles that can benefit an HBCU’s foundation and endowment are paramount to long-term stability. But this means seeing them as more than social clubs. HBCUs like all African American institutions are in perilous times and continued reliance on lottery philanthropy that may or may not come from non-alumni driven philanthropy (see Mackenzie Scott, Michael Bloomberg, etc.) is as dangerous as hoping to pay your bills every month with scratch off lottery tickets.

NACUBO Press Release:

“This year’s report shows how important well-managed endowments are to colleges and universities,” said Kara D. Freeman, NACUBO President and CEO. “Endowments help fuel innovation and serve as a stable foundation for institutions. Because of challenges in the economy, some institutions relied more heavily on their endowments—but that additional spending benefited students, faculty, staff, research, operations, and more. Endowments make college possible and more affordable, and contribute to better lives for all.”

NACUBO HIGHLIGHTS:

Top 10 HBCU Endowment Total – $2.4 billion*
Top 10 PWI Endowment Total – $340.0 billion
Number of PWIs Above $2 billion – 89
Number of PWIs Above $1 billion – 169
Number of HBCUs Above $1 billion – 1
Number of HBCUs Above $100 million – 4*
678 colleges, universities, and education-related foundations completed NACUBO’s FY25 survey and those institutions hold $953.7 billion of endowment assets with an average endowment of $1.4 billion and median endowment of $259.9 million.
HBCUs comprised 1.4 percent of NACUBO’s reporting institutions and 0.3 percent of the reporting endowment assets.
PWI endowments (32) with endowments over $5 billion hold 57.4 percent of the $953.7 billion in endowment assets.

**The change in market value does NOT represent the rate of return for the institution’s investments. Rather, the change in the market value of an endowment from FY24 to FY25 reflects the net impact of:
1) withdrawals to fund institutional operations and capital expenses;
2) the payment of endowment management and investment fees;
3) additions from donor gifts and other contributions; and
4) investment gains or losses.

SOURCE: NACUBO

Take a look at how an endowment works. Not only scholarships to reduce the student debt burden but research, recruiting talented faculty & students, faculty salaries, and a host of other things can be paid for through a strong endowment. It ultimately is the lifeblood of a college or university to ensure its success generation after generation.

Leave a comment

Posted in Lists

Tagged Black college endowment growth, college endowment rankings, college financial inequality, education endowment trends, HBCU alumni giving, hbcu endowments, HBCU financial stability, HBCU funding gap, HBCU investment strategies, HBCU Money rankings, higher education finance data, historically Black colleges finances, Howard University endowment, largest HBCU endowments, NACUBO endowment report, PWI vs HBCU endowments, Spelman College endowment, top Black colleges 2025, Top HBCU endowments 2025, university endowment statistics, wealth gap

Russell Wilson and Ciara Wilson: The Quiet Matchmakers Reshaping Black Love and Its Implications for African American Institutions

Posted on February 13, 2026 by hbcumoney | Leave a comment

Love is or it ain’t. Thin love ain’t love at all. – Toni Morrison, Beloved

When Pittsburgh Steelers wide receiver DK Metcalf proposed to Grammy-nominated singer Normani in March 2025, everyone saw the romance. But few understood the deeper significance. Three years earlier, Russell Wilson and Ciara had orchestrated the introduction at a party where Ciara made sure Normani attended. “They was playing cupid, but it worked,” Normani later said. “If you could trust a couple [to set you up], that would be the couple.”

Four months later in July 2025, when NBA star Donovan Mitchell proposed to singer Coco Jones, the Wilsons were once again celebrating behind the scenes. Russell had helped plan the proposal, working with luxury event planners to create the perfect moment.

Two high-profile engagements. One couple quietly orchestrating connections. But this isn’t just celebrity matchmaking—it’s something more profound. Russell and Ciara Wilson are modeling what intentional Black love looks like, and the ripple effects could fundamentally reshape African American institutional capacity at a moment when our community desperately needs it.

What makes the Wilsons’ matchmaking significant isn’t the celebrity of the couples they bring together—it’s the deliberateness of it. They’re not hoping love happens. They’re creating the conditions for it. They’re investing three years of relationship before an engagement. They’re using their social capital to bridge different professional spheres, connecting successful Black professionals across industries who might never meet organically despite moving in similar circles.

This kind of intentionality around Black love has historical resonance. During the segregation era and Jim Crow, when every institution worked to keep Black families separated and destabilized, our communities survived by being deliberate about connection. Churches served as matchmakers. Family networks facilitated introductions. HBCUs became spaces where Black professionals met their future spouses. The community understood that strong marriages weren’t just about individual happiness—they were about survival and institutional building.

The data reveals something striking: marriage rates for Black adults were higher than for white adults in every U.S. Census from 1890 to 1940—the height of overt racism and segregation. Even in 1960, the marriage rate for Black adults was 61%, and two-thirds of Black children lived in two-parent households. Today, only 31% of Black Americans are married, and half have never been married at all.

What changed wasn’t racism—that existed then and persists now. What changed was the infrastructure of intentionality around Black love. The systems that deliberately brought people together, that supported young marriages, that made partnership formation a community priority—those eroded while the obstacles remained.

Understanding what the Wilsons are doing requires understanding what Black families have survived—and what continues to threaten our ability to build generational wealth and institutional power through stable partnerships.

The historical attacks on Black family formation were systematic and devastating. During segregation, redlining prevented Black families from buying homes in appreciating neighborhoods, which meant that even when Black couples married and saved, their wealth accumulated at a fraction of the rate of white families. Housing policies created by the federal government in the 1930s explicitly designated Black neighborhoods as too risky for mortgage lending, forcing Black families into predatory contracts that often ended in eviction.

But perhaps no threat has been more insidious than the systematic devaluation of Black women as romantic partners. Research consistently shows that Black women face unique marginalization in the dating market. Studies reveal that Black women receive the lowest desirability ratings on dating platforms from men of all races, with one 2014 OKCupid analysis finding Black women rated as “least attractive” compared to women of other races. These aren’t just numbers—they reflect deep-seated stereotypes that paint Black women as too masculine, too strong, too independent, too angry to be desirable partners.

The roots of these stereotypes trace directly to slavery, when Black femininity was deliberately contrasted against white femininity to justify Black women’s oppression and exploitation. When Black women assertively advocate for themselves, society—including some Black men—uses labels like “loud,” “angry,” and “emasculating” to question their worthiness for romantic relationships. The myth persists despite Black women’s clear desire for marriage and partnership.

This devaluation creates a devastating cycle. Black men face their own pressures and internalized racism, sometimes leading them to view relationships outside the Black community as aspirational—an “upgrade” that signals status and success. The data bears this out: among Black newlyweds with bachelor’s degrees, men are more than twice as likely as women to marry outside their race (30% versus 13%). Some Black men internalize colorism and Eurocentric beauty standards, further narrowing the pool of Black women they consider desirable partners.

When successful Black men choose partners outside the community without understanding the implications, they dilute the very networks and institutional capacity the Black community needs to build generational power. They reduce the already constrained supply of partners for Black women who, despite facing the most challenging dating environment of any demographic, remain the group most committed to intra-racial partnership. This isn’t about policing individual choice—it’s about recognizing that individual choices, aggregated across thousands of successful Black professionals, have community-level consequences for institutional sustainability.

When the Great Migration brought millions of Black families north seeking better opportunities, they found wages increasing but housing wealth eroding. Segregated housing markets meant Black families paid higher rents for deteriorating properties while watching their neighborhoods decline in value. The very act of Black families moving into a neighborhood triggered white flight, which collapsed property values. Homes that should have been vehicles for wealth accumulation became wealth traps.

Then came the deliberate destruction. The Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 obliterated what was known as “Black Wall Street”—a thriving district where Black families owned land, operated businesses, and built wealth estimated at over $200 million in today’s dollars. Hundreds died, thousands were left homeless, and laws were passed to prevent survivors from rebuilding. This wasn’t unique. Chicago saw approximately 1,000 Black homes and businesses burned during the Red Summer of 1919. Across the country, thriving Black communities were systematically destroyed through racial violence that governments failed to prevent and often actively supported.

The wealth that did accumulate often couldn’t be transferred. Without access to estate planning services and facing discriminatory legal systems, many Black families lost property through “heirs property” designations that left land ownership unclear and prevented descendants from accessing the wealth their grandparents had built.

Today’s threats are more subtle but no less destructive. Mass incarceration has removed hundreds of thousands of Black men from their communities, destroying the gender balance needed for relationship formation. The student debt crisis hits Black families hardest—Black graduates owe an average of $25,000 more than their white peers—making the economic foundation for marriage more precarious. The wealth gap means young Black couples can’t fall back on family wealth during rough patches the way white couples can. Geographic dispersion means young Black professionals leave the high-marriage-rate states where HBCU ecosystems once facilitated connections, moving to cities where they’re isolated from institutional support networks.

But perhaps most damaging is the loss of cultural infrastructure around Black love. The deliberate community matchmaking of previous generations has largely disappeared. The social pressure and support for marriage has weakened. Dating apps have replaced friend introductions, optimizing for superficial attraction rather than shared values and compatible life goals. Young Black professionals, especially those who’ve left HBCU networks, often lack access to communities of Black peers navigating similar life stages.

The Wilsons understand something crucial: strong Black marriages aren’t just about personal fulfillment. They’re about building institutional capacity. When they facilitate a marriage between DK Metcalf and Normani, they’re not just creating a happy couple—they’re multiplying resources that could flow to Black institutions.

Consider the mathematics of it. Married couples don’t just have double the income of single individuals—they accumulate wealth exponentially faster. Black married couples have a median net worth of $131,000 compared to just $29,000 for single Black individuals. This isn’t because marriage magically creates money. It’s because marriage allows for coordinated financial strategy, shared expenses, combined networks, and the ability to take risks one income couldn’t support.

But the real multiplier effect extends beyond individual household wealth. Strong Black marriages create:

Coordinated Philanthropic Power: A married couple decides together where to direct resources. They create family foundations. They develop multi-year giving strategies to institutions they both value. They leverage their combined networks to recruit other donors. They become major benefactors rather than occasional contributors.

Intergenerational Institutional Commitment: Children from stable two-parent households inherit not just wealth but institutional loyalty. A child whose parents both attended HBCUs, both support Black cultural institutions, both invest in Black businesses—that child grows up with institutional commitment encoded in their identity. They become the next generation of supporters, leaders, and advocates.

Professional Network Effects: When two successful Black professionals marry, their networks merge. Different industries intersect, creating unexpected opportunities. Professional connections multiply. These network overlaps create opportunities for institutional partnerships, corporate sponsorships, business ventures, and talent pipelines that wouldn’t exist otherwise.

Resilience and Risk-Taking: Married couples can take risks single individuals cannot. They can invest in Black startups, fund untested ventures, support experimental programs, and make long-term commitments to institutions precisely because they have a partner sharing the risk. This risk-taking capacity is essential for institutional innovation and growth.

Cultural Modeling and Social Capital: Visible successful Black marriages change cultural narratives. They make marriage aspirational. They demonstrate what’s possible. They create social pressure in the positive sense—the expectation that successful Black professionals will find partners, build families, and invest in community. This cultural shift has compound effects across generations.

The geographic data supports this institutional impact. Seven of the top ten states with highest Black marriage rates—Virginia (34.0%), Maryland (33.2%), Texas and Delaware (32.8%), Florida and North Carolina (31.3%), and Georgia (30.9%)—are HBCU states. These states have thriving Black middle classes, strong African American institutions, and robust professional networks. The marriage rates aren’t coincidental—they’re evidence of how institutional ecosystems and family stability reinforce each other.

What the Wilsons are doing works because they understand marriage formation as network building. They’re not running a dating service. They’re curating a community of successful Black professionals who share values, understand each other’s pressures, and can build partnerships that transcend individual achievement.

Research shows people are still most likely to meet long-term partners through friends, family, or work rather than dating apps. The Wilsons are leveraging this truth at scale. Every couple they help create becomes a new node in an expanding network. Metcalf and Normani will introduce their single friends to each other. Mitchell and Jones will facilitate connections within their circles. The Wilsons’ nine-year marriage serves as the model and proof of concept.

This creates self-reinforcing cycles. Strong marriages produce stable families. Those families invest in institutions. Those institutions create spaces where the next generation forms relationships. Those relationships produce more strong marriages. The cycle builds momentum.

This is how communities accumulate power—not through individual success stories but through interconnected networks of families committed to collective advancement. During segregation, Black communities maintained this infrastructure deliberately because they had to. We knew that isolated success meant nothing if it couldn’t be transferred to the next generation or scaled across the community.

The Wilsons are reviving this model for the contemporary moment, when Black professionals are more economically successful than ever but often isolated from the institutional networks that would allow that success to compound.

Imagine if what the Wilsons are doing at the celebrity level was replicated across every tier of Black professional achievement. Imagine if young Black doctors, lawyers, engineers, educators, entrepreneurs were part of deliberate matchmaking networks that facilitated connections based on shared values and institutional commitment.

The compound effects would be staggering:

Economic Impact: Thousands of additional stable Black marriages would translate to billions in accumulated wealth. That wealth, properly channeled, could recapitalize Black institutions that have operated on shoestring budgets for generations. HBCUs could build endowments rivaling elite white institutions. Black hospitals could expand. Community development financial institutions could scale their lending. Black cultural institutions could thrive rather than merely survive.

Political Power: Married couples are more likely to vote, more likely to engage in civic life, more likely to serve on boards and run for office. A generation of politically engaged Black couples could fundamentally shift electoral dynamics and policy priorities in states with large Black populations.

Professional Advancement: The network effects of thousands of strategic Black marriages would create unprecedented opportunities for collaboration. Black entrepreneurs would have access to capital through their spouses’ networks. Black professionals would have insider information about opportunities through their partners’ connections. The “old boys network” that has excluded Black professionals for generations could be matched by networks of Black couples leveraging their combined social capital.

Cultural Renaissance: Stable Black families create the conditions for cultural production. Artists need economic security to take creative risks. Writers need time to develop their craft. Musicians need resources to experiment. When Black creative professionals have partners who can provide economic stability, the entire community benefits from their artistic output.

Institutional Sustainability: Perhaps most critically, networks of strong Black marriages ensure institutional continuity. When couples commit to supporting institutions together, those institutions can plan decades into the future. They can launch ambitious programs knowing they have committed donors. They can weather economic downturns because their supporter base is stable. They can dream bigger because their foundation is stronger.

But recognizing what’s possible raises uncomfortable questions about what’s missing. If the Wilsons can facilitate life-changing connections within celebrity circles, why doesn’t similar infrastructure exist for the thousands of Black professionals outside those circles? If marriage rates for Black adults were higher during Jim Crow than today, what infrastructure did we lose—and how do we rebuild it?

These questions don’t have simple answers, but they demand serious consideration:

How do we recreate the deliberate matchmaking infrastructure that sustained Black communities during segregation, adapted for contemporary circumstances? Church networks and family connections can’t carry the full weight when young Black professionals are geographically dispersed and disconnected from traditional institutions.

What would institutional investment in Black relationship formation look like? HBCUs, Black Greek organizations, professional associations, cultural institutions—these entities have the trust and access to facilitate connections. But do they recognize this as part of their mission? Do they allocate resources to it? Do they measure success by families formed, not just events hosted?

How do we address the structural barriers that make marriage economically precarious for young Black professionals? Student debt, wage gaps, wealth inequality, housing costs—these aren’t relationship problems, but they make relationship formation dramatically harder for Black Americans than for white Americans with similar educational attainment.

What role does media and culture play in shaping expectations around Black love? When the dominant narratives about Black relationships emphasize dysfunction and failure, when successful Black marriages are invisible, when young Black people grow up without models of healthy partnerships—this creates self-fulfilling prophecies that perpetuate the marriage gap.

How do we balance individual freedom and choice with community needs for strong families and institutions? Nobody should be pressured into marriage. But if the community loses the infrastructure that facilitates healthy relationship formation, individual freedom becomes isolation by default.

The Wilsons have shown what’s possible. Their intentional matchmaking, their sustained investment in couples’ success, their willingness to leverage their social capital for others’ benefit—this is the model. But celebrity circles can only accommodate so many couples. The question is how to scale this intentionality across the Black professional class.

The answer must be institutional, because only institutions can sustain infrastructure across generations. Individual matchmakers burn out. Informal networks fragment. But institutions—if properly designed and resourced—can maintain systems indefinitely.

What might institutional investment in Black love infrastructure look like?

HBCU Alumni Networks as Matchmaking Ecosystems: Alumni associations in major cities could host quarterly events specifically designed to facilitate connections among young Black professionals. Not awkward singles mixers, but sophisticated networking events, community service projects, cultural experiences where relationships form organically among people with shared backgrounds and values. Success could be measured not just by attendance but by marriages facilitated and families formed.

Black Professional Associations as Relationship Hubs: Organizations for Black lawyers, doctors, engineers, educators, entrepreneurs could recognize relationship facilitation as core to their mission. When successful Black professionals marry, their combined professional power benefits the entire community. These associations could create structured mentorship that pairs young professionals not just for career guidance but for life partnership modeling.

Technology Platforms Designed for Black Love: Dating apps optimize for engagement and superficial attraction. What if technology was designed specifically to facilitate meaningful connections among Black professionals committed to community building? Platforms that prioritize shared values, institutional loyalty, life goals, and cultural understanding over swipe-right dynamics.

Financial Incentives for Family Formation: What if institutions offered tangible support for young Black couples? Grants for couples pursuing marriage counseling. Low-interest loans for home purchases for alumni couples. Scholarships for children of HBCU alumni couples. These investments would pay dividends in institutional loyalty that compounds across generations.

Cultural Campaigns Celebrating Black Love: Media campaigns showcasing successful Black marriages, particularly among professionals committed to community advancement. Not aspirational fantasy but realistic portrayals of how successful couples navigate challenges, support each other’s growth, and invest in institutions. Make Black love visible, aspirational, and achievable.

Research Infrastructure: We lack basic data on what makes Black marriages successful. Which combinations of backgrounds, values, and life circumstances predict long-term partnership success? What interventions effectively support young Black couples through early marriage challenges? Hampton University’s National Center on African American Marriage and Parenting represents a start, but we need comprehensive research infrastructure that can inform evidence-based programming.

The answers won’t come from any single intervention but from a ecosystem of institutional support that makes Black love not just possible but probable. That makes stable marriages not just aspirational but expected. That makes family formation not just personal but communal.

Russell and Ciara Wilson didn’t set out to solve the Black marriage crisis or to transform African American institutional capacity. They’re simply two people who understand the value of healthy relationships and want to share that blessing with their friends.

But their efforts reveal what’s missing and what’s possible. They show that when influential people commit to facilitating connections within Black professional circles, life-changing partnerships form. They demonstrate that intentionality around Black love produces results that individual effort alone cannot achieve. They prove that building strong Black marriages is institution-building at its most fundamental level.

The viral social media pleas asking the Wilsons to expand their matchmaking aren’t just jokes. They reflect a genuine hunger for what the Wilsons provide—thoughtful facilitation of connections among Black professionals who share values and aspirations. They reveal the absence of infrastructure that our grandparents’ generation took for granted because it was built into the fabric of Black community life.

The declining marriage rate among African Americans isn’t inevitable. It’s the result of infrastructure collapse that can be reversed through deliberate institutional investment. The opportunity is to recognize that facilitating Black love isn’t tangential to institutional missions—it’s foundational to building the networks of stable families that will sustain Black institutions for generations.

Seven of the ten states with highest Black marriage rates are HBCU states, which means the foundation still exists. The communities are still present. The institutions still stand. What’s needed is leadership willing to acknowledge that the work of building Black institutional power begins with building Black families. That the work of building Black families requires intentional infrastructure. That the work of building that infrastructure is everyone’s responsibility who claims commitment to Black advancement.

The Wilsons are showing us what’s possible when two people commit to intentionally building Black love within their circles of influence. The question for the rest of us—for institutions, for leaders, for anyone with social capital and community commitment—is whether we’ll do the same within our own spheres. Whether we’ll recognize matchmaking as institution-building. Whether we’ll invest in the infrastructure that makes Black love not just possible but inevitable.

The fire is there. The Wilsons are fanning the flames. The question is whether the rest of us will add fuel until it becomes a blaze that lights the way for generations to come.

Leave a comment

Posted in Lifestyle

Tagged African American institutions, African American marriages, Black couples, Black family formation, black love, Black marriage rates, black philanthropy, black wealth building, Black women dating, celebrity matchmaking, Ciara, Coco Jones, DK Metcalf, Donovan Mitchell, hbcu alumni, HBCU relationships, interracial dating, Normani, relationship building, Russell Wilson

Teaching the Next Generation: A Guide to Empowering African American Youth Through Strategic Philanthropy

Posted on February 10, 2026 by hbcumoney | Leave a comment

A single twig breaks, but the bundle of twigs is strong. – Tecumseh

The tradition of giving runs deep in African American communities. From the mutual aid societies formed during enslavement to the church collections that funded the Civil Rights Movement, Black Americans have always understood that our collective survival depends on our willingness to invest in one another. Yet somewhere between necessity and aspiration, we’ve lost the language to teach our children that philanthropy isn’t charity—it’s power.

Teaching African American children ages 5-18 about philanthropy means doing more than dropping coins in a collection plate. It means helping them understand that strategic giving builds the institutions that will protect, educate, and employ them throughout their lives. It means showing them that every dollar they contribute to Black-led organizations is a vote for their own future.

Starting Early: Philanthropy for Elementary Ages (5-10)

Young children understand fairness instinctively. They know when something isn’t right, and they want to help fix it. This natural empathy creates the perfect foundation for introducing philanthropic concepts.

Begin with concrete examples from African American history. Tell them about the Free African Society, founded in 1787 by Richard Allen and Absalom Jones, which provided mutual aid to Black Philadelphians. Explain how enslaved people pooled resources to purchase freedom for family members. These aren’t abstract concepts they’re survival strategies that became institutional frameworks.

Create a family giving jar where children can contribute a portion of their allowance or gift money. Let them research and choose a Black-led organization to support quarterly. This could be a local youth program, a historical preservation society, or an HBCU scholarship fund. The key is giving them agency in the decision-making process. When children see their small contributions combine with others to create meaningful impact, they begin to understand collective power.

Use storytelling to illustrate how institutions are built. Talk about how HBCUs were created because white institutions excluded Black students. Explain how Mary McLeod Bethune started a school with $1.50 and turned it into Bethune-Cookman University. Show them that great institutions often begin with small, consistent contributions from people who understood the long game.

Middle School: Understanding Institutional Building (11-13)

By middle school, children can grasp more sophisticated concepts about how money moves and how power is built. This is when we introduce them to the difference between charity and institutional philanthropy.

Charity addresses immediate needs—feeding the hungry, clothing the poor. Institutional philanthropy builds the structures that create long-term change: schools, hospitals, community development corporations, legal defense funds, policy organizations. Both matter, but only institutional philanthropy shifts power dynamics.

Teach them about the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, established in 1940. Explain how sustained philanthropic support allowed lawyers like Thurgood Marshall to develop the legal strategy that led to Brown v. Board of Education. This wasn’t a one-time donation it was years of investment that transformed American society.

Introduce the concept of endowments and investment income. Too many African American organizations operate in perpetual crisis mode, chasing donations year after year. Show students the difference between an organization with a $100,000 annual budget that must be fundraised every twelve months and an organization with a $2 million endowment generating $80,000 annually in investment income. The second organization can focus on mission instead of survival.

Start a philanthropy club at school or in your community. Let students identify a need in their community and develop a giving circle to address it. They should practice everything: setting fundraising goals, researching organizations, making collective decisions, tracking impact, and understanding how their contributions grow through consistent giving. This hands-on experience transforms abstract concepts into practical skills.

High School: Strategic Power Building (14-18)

High school students are ready to understand philanthropy as a tool for social, economic, and political empowerment. They can analyze power structures and recognize how institutional support or the lack thereof shapes outcomes in Black communities.

Teach them to read institutional budgets and annual reports. Show them how to evaluate whether an organization has sufficient reserves, how much goes to programs versus overhead, and whether they’re building long-term sustainability. This financial literacy is essential for effective philanthropy.

Explore the concept of investment income in depth. Many students don’t realize that major institutions—universities, museums, hospitals—operate primarily on endowment income, not annual fundraising. Harvard’s endowment generated approximately $2.3 billion in investment income in recent years. Imagine if HBCUs collectively had similar resources. Explain that building Black institutional power requires moving beyond the donation mentality to an investment mindset.

Discuss how philanthropy intersects with political power. Show them how think tanks, policy organizations, and advocacy groups are funded. Explain that when Black communities don’t adequately fund our own policy organizations, others define the agenda affecting our lives. The Tea Party movement and its affiliated organizations received hundreds of millions in philanthropic support that reshaped American politics. What might be possible if African American communities invested similarly in organizations advancing our interests?

Examine collective philanthropy models. Traditional philanthropy often centers wealthy donors making large gifts. But collective giving where many people contribute smaller amounts has always been the African American philanthropic model. From church building funds to contemporary giving circles, we’ve understood that our strength lies in numbers. Today’s technology makes collective philanthropy more powerful than ever. A thousand people giving $100 monthly creates $1.2 million annually enough to endow a scholarship, support a community organization, or launch a new initiative.

Encourage students to start giving now, even if it’s $5 monthly to an organization they believe in. The habit matters more than the amount. A teenager who gives $10 monthly from age 16 to 66 contributes $6,000 in direct donations, but if that money is invested and earns average returns, it represents tens of thousands in institutional support.

Teaching African American youth about philanthropy means helping them understand its components and how they work together to build institutional power.

Educational Institutions: HBCUs, independent schools, scholarship funds, and educational support organizations create pathways to opportunity and preserve cultural knowledge. Sustained philanthropic support allows these institutions to build endowments, improve facilities, and attract top faculty and students.

Economic Development: Community development corporations, Black-owned business incubators, affordable housing organizations, and loan funds build wealth and economic stability. These institutions require patient capital and sustained support to create generational impact.

Legal and Policy Organizations: Civil rights organizations, legal defense funds, policy think tanks, and advocacy groups shape the rules that govern society. Inadequate funding in this sector means Black interests remain underrepresented in policy formation.

Cultural Institutions: Museums, historical societies, arts organizations, and media companies preserve our stories and shape narratives. Control over our cultural narrative requires institutional infrastructure that only sustained philanthropy can build.

Health and Social Services: Community health centers, mental health organizations, and social service providers address immediate needs while building the institutional capacity to serve Black communities long-term.

Each component requires different funding strategies. Some need operating support, others need capital for buildings or technology, many need endowment building. Teaching youth to think strategically about where and how they give helps them maximize impact.

The most important lesson we can teach African American children about philanthropy is that it’s not optional it’s essential. Every community that has built institutional power has done so through sustained, strategic philanthropy. Jewish communities support Jewish institutions. Asian American communities support Asian American institutions. African American communities must do the same.

Start conversations early. Make giving a family practice. Teach children to evaluate organizations critically. Help them understand that building Black institutional power is a marathon, not a sprint. Show them that their contributions, combined with others, create the schools, organizations, and institutions that will serve generations to come.

This isn’t about guilt or obligation. It’s about power, self-determination, and legacy. When we teach our children that philanthropy is institution-building, we give them tools to shape their own future rather than waiting for others to determine it for them.

The question isn’t whether African American communities can afford to invest in our institutions. The question is whether we can afford not to.

Leave a comment

Posted in Philanthropy

Tagged African American economic empowerment, African American institutions, African American philanthropy, Black community investment, Black financial literacy, Black institutional power, black wealth building, Black-led organizations, charitable giving education, collective giving circles, Community Development, endowment building strategies, generational wealth, HBCU fundraising, institutional philanthropy, philanthropy for kids, strategic philanthropy, teaching children about giving, youth philanthropy education

HBCU Money

When Rivalries Do Nothing: What 50 Cent and T.I. Could Learn from Rockefeller and Carnegie

From Four to Fifty: Rebuilding Black Boarding Schools and Day Schools for STEM Dominance

HBCU Money’s 2025 Top 10 HBCU Endowments

Russell Wilson and Ciara Wilson: The Quiet Matchmakers Reshaping Black Love and Its Implications for African American Institutions

Teaching the Next Generation: A Guide to Empowering African American Youth Through Strategic Philanthropy

Starting Early: Philanthropy for Elementary Ages (5-10)

Middle School: Understanding Institutional Building (11-13)

High School: Strategic Power Building (14-18)

Recent Posts

Archives

Categories

Meta