FROM OUR DATA DESK
Welcome to the new format of the Community Foundation Survey.
Over the past year, many of you have asked for a cleaner, more flexible way to explore and share this report. We listened. Now you can view trends by peer group, more easily compare performance and allocations across time horizons, and download only the visuals you need.
It’s the same data you’ve come to rely on, just easier to work with. No PDF skimming required.
We’ve also made space for fresh insights and quick takes throughout, helping you spot shifts faster. The features we’ve prioritized reflect what we’ve consistently heard from you and your peers: make it simpler to benchmark, easier to pull what matters, and faster to turn data into action.
This is just the start. Thank you for your engagement and input, which will continue to shape what comes next.
Jay Burke
Crewcial's Director of Information Management
Longtime steward of the Community Foundation Survey
FEATURED POLL RESULTS
Each quarter, we spotlight a timely pulse-check from your peers, offering a window into how fellow community foundations are planning, adapting, and executing in real time.
What are your investment committee’s top 3 priorities in a formal review process?
The poll surfaces a familiar pattern in IC self-review: dominant focus on portfolio performance versus benchmark and peers, close attention to IPS compliance, and comparatively little weight on the quality of committee deliberation, governance structure, or spending policy. A subset of responses reduces the question to a single answer, with some naming only performance-versus-benchmark and others only the absence of any formal process; neither is the review a perpetual institution actually needs.
Portfolio evaluation and governance evaluation are different disciplines. Both belong in a formal review. Benchmark returns describe what the market did with the allocation; they don’t measure whether the committee is spending its time on the right questions, decision quality is improving, or spending policy is preserving purchasing power on horizons that match the mission.
That distinction sits at the center of Who Evaluates the Evaluators? How Foundations Should Measure the Success of Their Investment Committees, a session Crewcial’s CIO Mike Miller will moderate at this fall’s FAOG conference, drawing on CFO, IC chair, OCIO, and mission-officer perspectives.
SHORT TERM PERFORMANCE
This section surfaces near-term shifts across peer groups and portfolio types, helping you track momentum, volatility, and divergence before they show up in long-range trends.
Community foundation portfolios posted a strong second quarter of 2026. Across all participants, the median return was +9.7% for the quarter, lifting year-to-date to +8.7% and the trailing one-year to +17.7%. The exposures that hurt in Q1 became the ones that carried this quarter: US large-cap led (+15.5%), non-US developed rebounded (+10.8%), and emerging markets ran (+24.1%).
Cohort dispersion compressed. Medium-sized foundations ($50–99.9M) topped the group at +10.1%; the smallest cohort (under $25M) sat at +9.5%. ESG pools reversed direction sharply, posting +10.4% after leading declines in Q1. Balanced pools tracked their more conservative posture at +7.5%, trailing both the 60/40 benchmark (+8.5%) and the broad median. Investment-grade bonds barely moved (+0.7%), continuing to provide little cushioning against equity volatility in either direction. The durable read across both quarters is that the portfolios best positioned for both moves are the ones that did not have to chase either.
PERFORMANCE TEARSHEETS
Explore performance and allocation trends by peer group, size, and strategy; then download only what you need. The new middle section surfaces relevant insights across peer groups, setting the stage for future surveys where you can help shape and unpack the most pressing questions.
- MEGA
- X-LARGE
- LARGE
- MEDIUM
- SMALL
- MICRO
- ALL
- BALANCED
- ESG
Median Performance by Strategy
The median foundation returned +9.8% in the second quarter of 2026, with strategy-level results ranging from +7.5% for balanced portfolios to +10.1% for high-equity, no-alternatives, and ESG cohorts. Q1’s pattern reversed cleanly: alternatives-heavy portfolios that protected in Q1 trailed in Q2, as US and non-US public equity both delivered. No-alternatives portfolios (+18.1% trailing one-year) lead the multi-year table, followed closely by high-equity portfolios (+17.8%).
Short-horizon dispersion is real, but compresses to roughly a percentage point across strategies at 10, 15, and 20 years. The immediate quarter tells a stark story; the trailing decade tells a more forgiving one. Both are true, but only one belongs in a construction decision.
HISTORICAL ASSET ALLOCATIONS
This long-view snapshot highlights shifts in asset allocation, revealing trends in equity exposure, diversification into alternatives, and capital preservation across market cycles.
Understanding the Allocation Gap Between Top and Bottom Performers
The allocation profiles of top- and bottom-decile foundations diverged further in Q2 than in Q1. Top-decile foundations now carry 48.4% US large-cap and just 6.8% alternatives; bottom-decile peers hold 28.5% US large-cap and 34.2% alternatives, with the bulk of that in private equity (20.9%). The composition gap has widened structurally quarter over quarter.
Because decile placement reflects trailing three-year returns, not the quarter itself, this widening reflects a structural divergence built over the same window, not a Q2 artifact. That makes the gap informative, though it doesn't prove the top-decile group's larger cap weighting or the bottom-decile group's private equity concentration drove returns; it does support using current allocation posture to gauge whether a foundation's structural stance still fits the committee's risk tolerance and spending needs.
DOWNLOAD PREVIOUS REPORTS
-
2026
-
2025
-
2024
-
2023
-
DISCLOSURESThe analysis and performance information contained herein reflects that of participants of a performance survey requested by Crewcial Partners, LLC (“Crewcial Partners”), a Securities and Exchange Commission Registered Investment Advisor, and the Fiscal and Administrative Officers Group for Community Foundations (“FAOG”). Peer benchmarking provides important information for foundation boards, investment committees, staff, consultants and donors. This is the only community foundation investment performance survey that Crewcial Partners, LLC is aware of that provides timely quarter-end data across all foundation sizes. For these reasons, and to ensure representation across different portfolio sizes and strategies, participation was encouraged.This information should not be relied upon for tax purposes and is based upon sources believed to be reliable. No guarantee is made to the completeness or accuracy of this information. Crewcial Partners shall not be responsible for any trading decisions, damages, or other losses resulting from, or related to, the information, data, analyses or opinions contained herein or their use, which do not constitute investment advice, are provided as of the date written, are provided solely for informational purposes, and therefore are not an offer to buy or sell a security. This information has not been tailored to suit any individual. Crewcial Partners does not guarantee the results of its advice or recommendations, or that the objectives of a strategy will be achieved. Portfolios offered by Crewcial Partners may not have contained and/or may not currently contain the same underlying holdings and may have been and/or may currently be managed according to rules or restrictions established by Crewcial Partners. All data presented is based on the most recent information available to Crewcial Partners as of the date indicated and may not be an accurate reflection of current data. There is no assurance that the data will remain the same.The presentation contains performance data reported to us. Median returns reflects the approximate deduction of advisory fees, brokerage or other commissions, and any other expenses that a client would have paid. All investments involve the risk of loss, including (among other things) loss of principal, a reduction in earnings (including interest, dividends, and other distributions), and the loss of future earnings. You should consider these risks prior to investing.Benchmark returns are used for comparative purposes only and are not intended to directly parallel the risk or investment style of the accounts included in the composite. The volatility of the indices compared herein may be materially different from that of the compared Crewcial Partners strategy. There is no guarantee that the strategies will outperform, or even match, benchmark returns over the long term.No graph, chart, or formula in this presentation can be used in and of itself to determine which securities to buy or sell, when to buy or sell securities, whether to invest using this investment strategy, or whether to engage Crewcial Partners’s investment advisory services. Performance is calculated on a total return basis and does not include reinvestment of income. Actual fees will vary depending upon, among other things, the applicable fee schedule and portfolio size. These performance presented is based upon survey information that was provided to Crewcial Partners, LLC, and Crewcial Partners, LLC consolidated the information in to this presentation. Overall returns may be reduced by expenses that an investor may incur in the management of the investor’s account, such as for custody or trading services, which will vary by investor. Investments in securities are subject to investment risk, including possible loss of principal. Prices of securities may fluctuate from time to time and may even become valueless. Securities in this report are not FDIC-insured, may lose value, and are not guaranteed by a bank or other financial institution. Before making any investment decision, investors should read and consider all the relevant investment product information. Investors should seriously consider if the investment is suitable for them by referencing their own financial position, investment objectives, and risk profile before making any investment decision. There can be no assurance that any financial strategy will be successful.
Specializing in...
Nullam orci sem, aliquet ac convallis et, ornare vel lorem.
Example Specialty
Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Quisque hendrerit eleifend lectus, vitae pellentesque lectus molestie sit amet.
Example Specialty
Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Quisque hendrerit eleifend lectus, vitae pellentesque lectus molestie sit amet.
Example Specialty
Interdum et malesuada fames ac ante ipsum primis in faucibus. Quisque hendrerit eleifend lectus, vitae pellentesque lectus molestie sit amet.
Add Headline Here
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
Example Service
Subheadline goes here
enean ac egestas mi. Mauris eros erat, accumsan eu facilisis non, commodo id lacus. Fusce sodales volutpat nisl lacinia auctor.
Example Service
Subheadline goes here
enean ac egestas mi. Mauris eros erat, accumsan eu facilisis non, commodo id lacus. Fusce sodales volutpat nisl lacinia auctor.
Example Service
Subheadline goes here
enean ac egestas mi. Mauris eros erat, accumsan eu facilisis non, commodo id lacus. Fusce sodales volutpat nisl lacinia auctor.
Example Service
Subheadline goes here
enean ac egestas mi. Mauris eros erat, accumsan eu facilisis non, commodo id lacus. Fusce sodales volutpat nisl lacinia auctor.
Example Service
Subheadline goes here
enean ac egestas mi. Mauris eros erat, accumsan eu facilisis non, commodo id lacus. Fusce sodales volutpat nisl lacinia auctor.
Example Service
Subheadline goes here
enean ac egestas mi. Mauris eros erat, accumsan eu facilisis non, commodo id lacus. Fusce sodales volutpat nisl lacinia auctor.
What Our Clients Say
Food truck jean shorts narwhal, sustainable marfa post-ironic heirloom gluten-free wayfarers you probably.
Cupping chicharrones hexagon vaporware. Helvetica beard taiyaki, DIY drinking vinegar PBR&B tonx vape godard tofu. Meggings echo park taxidermy big mood asymmetrical next level.
John Smith
Director of Marketing
Cupping chicharrones hexagon vaporware. Helvetica beard taiyaki, DIY drinking vinegar PBR&B tonx vape godard tofu. Meggings echo park taxidermy big mood asymmetrical next level.
John Smith
Director of Marketing
Cupping chicharrones hexagon vaporware. Helvetica beard taiyaki, DIY drinking vinegar PBR&B tonx vape godard tofu. Meggings echo park taxidermy big mood asymmetrical next level.
John Smith
Director of Marketing
Add a headline here
Curabitur dignissim mauris et risus efficitur ultrices. Integer porta felis ac sem aliquet pulvinar.
CREWCIAL INSIGHTS
These short reads—complete with optional audio—offer perspective on the investment dilemmas, philosophical tensions, and evolving capital strategies shaping today’s nonprofit landscape. Future editions will continue to reflect the questions and quandaries you raise through our surveys, so if there’s a topic you want us to unpack, speak up. We’re listening.
4 min read
The Same War Reinforcing the Dollar Is Breaking Its Architecture
Michael Miller: Apr 8, 2026
4 min read
Cloud Infrastructure Under Fire By Iran
Crewcial Partners: Apr 16, 2026
Be Part of the Benchmark
Help shape the industry’s most trusted dataset on community foundation performance. Join a growing network of peers contributing quarterly data to fuel smarter comparisons, sharper insights, and stronger outcomes for all.















