LHC
Strengthening Public-Philanthropic Partnerships
Read the report at Little Hoover Commission ↗
Strengthening Public-Philanthropic
Partnerships
Report #288 | May 2025
Milton Marks Commission on California State
Government Organization and Economy
www.lhc.ca.gov
LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION Dedicated to Promoting Economy and
Pedro Nava Efficiency in California State Government
Chair
The Little Hoover Commission, formally known as the Milton
Anthony Cannella
Marks “Little Hoover” Commission on California State Government
Vice Chair
Organization and Economy, is an independent state oversight agency.
Dion Aroner
David Beier By statute, the Commission is a bipartisan board composed of
five public members appointed by the governor, four public
Senator Christopher Cabaldon
members appointed by the Legislature, two senators and
Assemblymember Phillip Chen
two assemblymembers.
Gil Garcetti
José Atilio Hernández* In creating the Commission in 1962, the Legislature declared
its purpose:
Jason Johnson
Gayle Miller
...to secure assistance for the Governor and itself in
Senator Roger Niello promoting economy, efficiency and improved services in the
Assemblymember Liz Ortega transaction of the public business in the various departments,
Janna Sidley* agencies and instrumentalities of the executive branch of
the state government, and in making the operation of all
*Served on study subcommittee
state departments, agencies and instrumentalities, and
all expenditures of public funds, more directly responsive
to the wishes of the people as expressed by their elected
COMMISSION STAFF
representatives...
Ethan Rarick
Executive Director The Commission fulfills this charge by listening to the public,
consulting with the experts and conferring with the wise. In the
Tamar Foster
course of its investigations, the Commission typically empanels
Deputy Executive Director
advisory committees, conducts public hearings and visits
Krystal Beckham
government operations in action.
Daniel Harris-McCoy
Ashley Hurley Its conclusions are submitted to the Governor and the Legislature
for their consideration. Recommendations often take the form
Shara McAlister
of legislation, which the Commission supports through the
legislative process.
Contacting the Commission
All correspondence should be addressed to the Commission Office:
Little Hoover Commission
925 L Street, Suite 805, Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 445-2125 | LittleHoover@lhc.ca.gov
This report is available from the Commission’s website at www.lhc.ca.gov.
Letter from the Chair
May 29, 2025
The Honorable Gavin Newsom
Governor of California
The Honorable Mike McGuire The Honorable Brian Jones
President pro Tempore of the Senate Senate Minority Leader
and members of the Senate
The Honorable Robert Rivas The Honorable James Gallagher
Speaker of the Assembly Assembly Minority Leader
and members of the Assembly
DEAR GOVERNOR AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE:
Partnerships with philanthropic organizations play a key role in California’s efforts to address a wide array of
problems. By linking arms with philanthropy, state government can do more to help provide the services that
our citizens need.
But could the state make those relationships easier and smoother for its philanthropic partners? That is the
question that the Commission sought to address when it undertook a study of California’s public-philanthropic
partnerships. This report provides part of the answer, focusing on how the state can better partner with
philanthropies seeking to help fund public services. Later this year we hope to release a second report in this
series, addressing how state government can be a better partner when it provides grants or other funding to
philanthropies.
In many respects, the story told in this report is a successful one. The state has emphasized public-philanthropic
partnerships in recent years, mobilizing nearly $18 billion in combined public and private funding for a variety
of causes. Yet we believe more can be done, and thus we make four recommendations aimed at continuing the
continuity of public-philanthropic partnerships, coordinate with the Legislature, and collect needed data.
The Commission respectfully submits this work and stands ready to assist as the state seeks to improve its
working relationship with philanthropic partners.
Sincerely,
Pedro Nava, Chair
Little Hoover Commission
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 1
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................3
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC
PARTNERSHIPS......................................................................................5
Public-Philanthropic Partnerships in California...............................................6
The Growth of Public-Philanthropic Partnerships.................................6
MANAGING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS....................6
ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS IN
CALIFORNIA...........................................................................................8
Trust as a Foundational Element.......................................................................8
Shared Values and Aligned Goals.....................................................................11
Leadership and Institutional Support.............................................................11
Addressing Structural Inequities through Capacity Building.......................12
Leveraging Flexible Resources to Innovate....................................................12
Speed and Nimbleness in Tackling Challenges...............................................12
Limitations of Public-Philanthropic Partnerships.........................................12
OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC
PARTNERSHIPS.....................................................................................13
Further Institutionalize Public-Philanthropic Partnerships.........................13
Recommendation 1..................................................................................17
Recommendation 2..................................................................................17
Recommendation 3..................................................................................18
Impact Data —Expand Monitoring & Evaluation...........................................18
Recommendation 4..................................................................................18
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................19
NOTES....................................................................................................20
2 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Executive Summary
The State of California partners with philanthropic improve initiatives over time. Alignment between
organizations to address societal problems through public and philanthropic goals ensure that
public-philanthropic partnerships. Under Governor partnerships are strategic and focused. Dedicated
Gavin Newsom, the state has engaged in 107 liaisons within agencies enable coordination, while
partnerships across 27 departments and agencies, philanthropic partners bring flexibility and speed
involving more than 250 philanthropic partners. often lacking in traditional government operations.
These collaborations have mobilized a combined
Public-philanthropic partnerships are not a substitute
$17.8 billion – $13.6 billion in state funds and $4.2
for sustainable public funding for core government
billion from philanthropic organizations – to support
responsibilities, however. They cannot resolve
a range of initiatives, including disaster relief,
fundamental policy failures or fill chronic fiscal gaps.
workforce training, reentry support for incarcerated
Rather, they should be seen as complementary tools
individuals, and reproductive healthcare.1
– valuable for piloting programs, fostering innovation,
California employs several models of collaboration and accelerating responses to emerging challenges,
in its public-philanthropic partnerships. Some but ultimately dependent on government action for
initiatives rely on direct funding, where philanthropic long-term implementation and scale.
organizations contribute money directly to public
To strengthen and sustain California’s public-
coffers. Others take the form of technical assistance,
philanthropic infrastructure, the Little Hoover
where foundations provide expertise and capacity-
makes four recommendations. These are intended
building resources. In co-funding partnerships, public
to ensure the continuity of public-philanthropic
and philanthropic actors pool resources to jointly
partnerships across administrations and at the
support programs, while in coordinated partnerships,
agency level, facilitate coordination with the
each partner funds complementary projects aligned
Legislature, and collect the data necessary to ensure
with a shared goal.
the state and its partners are creating the impact
Structurally, California’s public-philanthropic they desire, provide an opportunity to course correct
partnerships are led by the Office of the Governor. if not, and demonstrate to Californians the value of
Previously, the senior advisor for social innovation these investments.
managed state partnerships; more recently,
Recommendations
the partnership portfolio has transferred to
the senior advisor for civic engagement and
1. The State of California should fund and make
strategic partnerships. There also are designated
permanent within the executive branch a senior
philanthropic-partnership liaisons at 10 state
advisor position responsible for public-philanthropic
departments and agencies. All of these liaisons are
partnerships.
senior staff members who hold leadership positions
within the agency. a.) As part of their responsibilities, this person
should liaise with the Attorney General’s Office
Several factors contribute to the success of these
on messaging with newly-formed foundations
initiatives. Leadership from the Governor’s Office
to ensure they know they can work with
signals these partnerships are a priority and
government.
ensures buy-in across state government. Trust
and transparent communication form the basis
for collaboration, allowing partners to adjust and
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 3
2. The State of California should continue its
efforts to establish a partnership liaison in major
departments and agencies.
3. The state legislature should create a centralized
point of reference on public-philanthropic
partnerships, both to communicate with the
philanthropic community and to communicate with
the administration.
4. The State of California should create a formal
monitoring and evaluation and reporting process
located outside of the Office of the Governor for
public-philanthropic partnerships.
a) As part of this process, the state should collect
demographic data on which Californians are
benefiting from the partnership.
b) Additionally, the state should study the ways
in which outside organizations partner with
the state to see if some models lead to greater
efficiencies and/or impact than others.
California’s partnerships demonstrate the power
of collaboration between government and
philanthropy to promote innovation and equity. By
institutionalizing the factors that make partnerships
successful, expanding infrastructure, and embedding
data-driven accountability into its partnerships, the
state can ensure they continue to thrive and evolve in
service of all Californians.
4 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Strengthening Public-Philanthropic
Partnerships
Partnerships between state government and The Little Hoover Commission held hearings
philanthropies have played an increasingly important to assess this work and recommend potential
role in delivering services to Californians. These improvements to provide even better services.
partnerships have, among other things, helped to Building upon the testimony the Commission
provide disaster relief, job training, and various received, this report examines the critical role that
services for people getting out of prison. Governor California’s public-philanthropic collaborations play in
Gavin Newsom has prioritized such partnerships enhancing public policy effectiveness and designing
during his tenure, starting with creating a cabinet- responses to the challenges faced by Californians.
level position to facilitate this work. Since Newsom
California has invested in the infrastructure
took office in 2019, the state has engaged in 107
necessary for effective collaboration, and, based
partnerships among 27 different state agencies
upon the success of initiatives ranging from financial
and departments with more than 250 philanthropic
relief for undeserved communities to improving food
partners. The state has contributed $13.6 billion
distribution during crises, California can both build
toward these partnerships, while philanthropic
upon its own past success and serve as a model for
foundations donated another $4.2 billion.2
other states.
Types of Public-Philanthropic Partnerships
Witness Don J. Howard, CEO and President of the James Irvine Foundation, outlined several types of
public-philanthropic partnerships. These include:
Direct funding partnerships Coordinated partnerships
In direct funding partnerships, In coordinated partnerships, state
philanthropic organizations provide entities and philanthropic funders
financial support directly to the share an objective, but fund different
government agency with which projects to reach that objective.
they’re partnering.
Co-funding partnerships Technical assistance partnerships
In co-funding partnerships, the public In these partnerships, the
and philanthropic partners pool their philanthropy helps the public sector
resources to increase the scale and build capacity in an area by providing
impact of a project, but one entity specialized expertise, training, or
does not give money directly to the resources.
other entity.
Don J. Howard. October 17, 2024. Written testimony to the Commission. Pages 3-5. Available here: https://lhc.ca.gov/wp-content/
uploads/4.-Irvine-Written-testimony-on-public-private-partnerships_Don-J.-Howard-of-The-James-Irvine-Foundation_10.11.24.pdf.
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 5
Public-Philanthropic complement and enhance governmental initiatives,
creating opportunities for innovative, large-scale
Partnerships in California
impact.
Public-philanthropic partnerships are strategic
The late 1990s and early 2000s witnessed the advent
collaborations between government entities
of dedicated institutions to formalize and foster
and philanthropic organizations to solve societal
public-philanthropic partnerships. At the state level,
challenges. They combine the public sector’s
for example, Michigan pioneered the Governor's
resources, policy reach, and implementation capacity
Office of Foundation Liaison in 2003, which was
alongside the relative flexibility of philanthropy’s
instrumental in brokering partnerships focused on
funding and ability to experiment.
early childhood development, K-12 education, and
THE GROWTH OF PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC workforce readiness, among other areas. Discussed
PARTNERSHIPS further in the Box found on page 7, this model later
The growth of California public-philanthropic spread to California, North Carolina, and Maryland.5
partnerships builds on an evolution that expanded
Managing Public-Philanthropic
public-philanthropic partnerships across the
United States. Large-scale partnerships between Partnerships
government and philanthropy in the U.S. can be
Public-Philanthropic partnerships have shown the
traced to the aftermath of crises. In California, for
potential for substantial policy achievements in the
example, the civil unrest in Los Angeles in 1992
past few years. These include:
spurred the establishment of initiatives like the Los
Angeles Urban Funders. This collaborative effort
◊ High Road Training Programs. Partnerships
brought together public and private actors to address
used more than $5 million in funding to support
systemic inequities in low-income communities.3
eight High Road Training Programs. These
programs equip workers with the resources,
Philanthropy as an institution in the U.S. underwent
training, education, and support needed to obtain
a dramatic transformation starting in the late 20th
higher-paying jobs in environmentally-sustainable
century, resulting in an increased prominence
industries.6
of public-philanthropic collaboration. This shift
coincided with the growth of private giving, which ◊ Guaranteed income pilot programs. The
in inflation-adjusted dollars more than doubled Guaranteed Income Pooled Fund helped provide
between 1995 and 2018, from $203 billion to $428 monthly stipends for 1,070 people, predominantly
billion in 2018. Concurrently, the amount foundations pregnant people and foster youth, via three
gave to their supported causes doubled as a relative pilot programs by leveraging $1.4 million in
share of total private giving, reaching 18 percent by philanthropic support and $12.1 million in state
2018.4 funding. These pilots test the idea that no-strings-
attached stipends to low-income individuals can
Philanthropic organizations increasingly adopted
prevent and disrupt poverty.7
strategic approaches such as capacity building
◊ Access to reproductive care. Donors have
and advocacy for policy reforms, which provided
contributed more than $1.5 million to the
a framework for collaboration with governmental
Reproductive Freedom Alliance, which Governor
entities. These strategies were designed not only to
Newsom created to facilitate collaboration to
directly address socioeconomic issues, but also to
preserve access to reproductive care in California
6 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Case Study: Michigan’s Governor’s Office of Foundation
Liaison
The Michigan Governor’s Office of Foundation Liaison (OFL) is a groundbreaking initiative
established in 2003 to foster collaboration between public and philanthropic sectors to
address critical statewide issues. Then-Governor Jennifer Granholm created the office as a
response to growing recognition of the need for cross-sector collaboration. Traditionally,
public and philanthropic sectors worked independently, often pursuing overlapping goals
without coordination. The establishment of the OFL institutionalized the state’s commitment to
collaboration by dedicating state-level resources to liaise between the two sectors.
The OFL facilitated several collaborations that demonstrated the potential for coordinated efforts
between government and philanthropy to achieve significant outcomes. These include:
◊ Early childhood education reforms. The partnership leveraged $10 million in private funding
from Michigan-based foundations to secure a federal Race to the Top grant of $51.7 million.
This funding supported the state's early childhood programs, focusing on enhancing access and
quality for underserved communities.
◊ Workforce development initiatives. The OFL connected private and public stakeholders to
create programs addressing skill gaps in Michigan’s labor market. Through public-philanthropic
partnerships, the state implemented initiatives that supported job training and retraining for
workers in transition, particularly during the economic downturn of 2008-2009.
◊ Health and human services. The OFL helped initiatives aimed at improving health outcomes
for Michiganders, particularly in developing evidence-based intervention programs that tackled
underlying health disparities in communities.
◊ Engagement with local governments. The OFL helped local governments in Michigan connect
with foundation resources that might have been otherwise inaccessible. This support directed
enhanced funding and expertise to regional and municipal issues.
Michigan’s leaders credit the OFL with several positive outcomes. These include the office’s ability to
function as a long-term policy advisor for new executive officer personnel due to its longevity and
stability. Another is the dialogue between philanthropy and government officials and being able to
bring philanthropy into the creation of initiatives due to a pathway to access the governor’s policy
advisors.
Sources: Kathleen Kelly Janus. Summer 2024. “Effective government Demands Partnership.” Stanford Social Innovation Review.
https://ssir.org/articles/entry/public-private-partnerships-innovation-scale. Page 41. Also, Council of Michigan Foundations.
“Governor’s Office of Foundation Liaison.” https://www.michiganfoundations.org/policy/governors-office-foundation-liaison.
Accessed February 3, 2025. Also, Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University. June 2021. “A Case Study of
Michigan During Crisis.” https://live-michiganfoundations.pantheonsite.io/resources/case-study-michigan-during-crisis. Accessed
February 3, 2025.
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 7
and 21 other states. As part of this initiative, ◊ California Health and Human Services Agency
California has stockpiled medication and worked
◊ California Natural Resources Agency
with pharmacies to ensure patients have access
◊ California Office of Emergency Services
to it, created an online resource hub, and held
a summit to share best practices, among other ◊ California Governor’s Office of Business and
actions.8 Economic Development
◊ Wildfire resilience planning. A partnership ◊ Government Operations Agency
between the state and Google.org has resulted ◊ Labor and Workforce Development Agency
in the philanthropy providing in-kind support to
◊ Office of Community Partnerships and Strategic
create a wildfire resilience planning tool. Intended
Communications
to help regional planners by consolidating the
best available science and state and federal data At the agency level, the Labor and Workforce
in a free, easy-to-use format, Planscape shows Development Agency (LWDA) serves as a prime
the conditions of the landscape across California, example of how partnerships are operationalized.
provides visualizations of landscape treatments The LWDA’s partnership liaison, the deputy
and how they affect fire conditions, and helps plan secretary for workforce strategy, is responsible for
new treatment areas.9 managing relationships with philanthropies, securing
funding, and facilitating cross-agency collaboration.
The management of these partnerships in California
The LWDA has coordinated partnerships with
is distributed among senior staff members within
philanthropies like the Hilton Foundation to improve
agencies, with a focus on embedding collaboration
workforce outcomes for youth and communities
within the state’s administrative infrastructure.
facing economic inequities. These efforts are often
Upon taking office in 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom
supported through joint funding mechanisms and
decided that the facilitation of public-philanthropic
collaborative planning with other public agencies,
partnerships was sufficiently important that it
such as the Employment Development Department
should be included in the portfolio of a member of
(EDD) and the Department of Rehabilitation.12
the Office of the Governor. From 2019 to February
2025, the senior advisor for social innovation held Assessment of Public-
that responsibility. As of this report’s publication,
Philanthropic Partnerships in
that portfolio has been shifted to the senior
California
advisor for civic engagement and community
partnerships. Under either title, this position serves Witnesses from the philanthropic, public, and
as a liaison across state agencies and philanthropic academic sectors told the Commission that California
organizations, coordinating collaborative efforts and has much to be proud of with its approach to public-
ensuring strategies align with the state’s priorities.10 philanthropic partnerships. Specifically, there are
several elements that witnesses testified make these
Ten California state departments and agencies have a
partnerships successful:
senior staff member whose portfolio includes public-
philanthropic partnerships:11 TRUST AS A FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENT
All witnesses acknowledged trust as a fundamental
◊ Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency
ingredient to successful public-philanthropic
◊ California Environmental Protection Agency partnerships. “Trust lays the foundation for long-term
◊ California Department of Food and Agriculture impact and continued collaboration,” testified Senior
8 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Evidence-Based Grantmaking: President Obama’s Office
of Social Innovation and Civic Participation
President Barack Obama created the Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation (OSICP)
in 2009 to champion innovation as a driver of change, and leverage collaboration between
federal agencies and organizations from outside of government to deliver measurable social
impacts. It was created within the Domestic Policy Council, and deviated from traditional
government initiatives by promoting an evidence-based approach to funding, and collaborating
heavily with non-governmental sectors. Instead of relying solely on direct federal funding, the
OSICP placed an emphasis on creating partnerships that blended public and private funds to
drive innovation.
The office’s hallmark was its use of a competitive grant-making model, specifically through
the Social Innovation Fund (SIF). This fund focused on identifying successful, evidence-backed
programs across fields like education, workforce development, and health, with the goal of
scaling and replicating proven concepts nationwide. By requiring grantees to match federal
funding dollar-for-dollar with private funding, the office minimized public outlay while achieving
results beyond what government could accomplish alone.
A meta analysis of programs funded by the Social Innovation Fund primarily during its first year
of implementation found that this approach yielded more evidence-based changes than those
from a random sample of national grants. Specifically, the SIF grantees had greater growth than
those in the national sample in:
◊ Conducting rigorous evaluation of the program.
◊ Using evaluation findings to improve the program.
◊ Using evaluation findings to demonstrate and communicate the effectiveness of the
program.
◊ Funding sub-grantees to pay for evaluations, as well as providing training and technical
assistance to sub-grantees to conduct rigorous evaluations.
◊ Using rigorous evaluations to choose which programs to scale up.
◊ Participating in more funding alliances and knowledge-sharing collaborations.
Sources: Obama Whitehouse Archives. “The President’s Social Innovation Agenda.” https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/
administration/eop/sicp/about. Accessed March 3, 2025. Also, Corporation for national and Community Service. Social
Innovation Fund: Our Model. http://web.archive.org/web/20161211024634/https://www.nationalservice.gov/programs/
social-innovation-fund/our-model. Accessed March 3, 2025. Also, Corporation for National and Community Service. 2016.
Social Innovation Fund National Assessment Fact Sheet. Available here: https://www.americorps.gov/sites/default/files/
evidenceexchange/SIF-National-Assessment-Fact-Sheet-2015_0_1.pdf.
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 9
Documenting Truth and Healing in California
In 2019, Governor Newsom initiated a process to explore the historical relationship between the
state and indigenous people who were harmed by it. The California Truth and Healing Council
will produce a report that documents that relationship and may make “recommendations aimed
at reparation and restoration and consider how to prevent similar depredations and/or policies
in the future.”
Another part of the process is to document the testimony and stories shared that will “serve as
a historical record and resource for generations to come.” A partnership among the state, tribes,
and foundations is funding this documentary.
Filmmaker Jacob Kornbluth explains why storytelling beyond reports is necessary:
I’ve been blessed to be a director of numerous films, television, and other “content” for over 25 years.
It isn’t hyperbole to say that what has kept me going, in a nutshell, is what happened when I showed
up to those Truth and Healing meetings. It’s simply thrilling to learn to see the world in a different way,
and to share that story in a way that helps others.
As soon as the crew and I pulled up to Palisades resort for Day 1 of the first Truth and Healing meeting
I attended, everything about the Native people I met refused to be easily categorized or distilled
into a report. The setting was (literally, given the elevation) breathtaking. Snow covered mountains,
picturesque pine trees and mountain cabins. It was a post card.
Inside, a small group of people gathered to provide plenty of dramatic testimony. I was surprised to
learn that for the Washoe people “Tahoe” means “lake”, so whenever they hear “Lake Tahoe” they hear
“Lake Lake”. This got a laugh in the room.
I heard a siren the night before at nightfall in a nearby mountain town that I didn’t understand; I came
to learn that this was a sound they would play to warn the Indians that if anyone was out they had to
get home or be rounded up and thrown in jail. There was testimony of the State offering bounties for
Washoe scalps — scalps of the speakers’ ancestors. These stories devastated all the folks in attendance.
But, those stories really didn’t do justice to the nuance of the people and the relationships. There was
plenty of laughter, of sharing what TV show they were binge-watching, of who is dating who. It was the
unique-ness of the people I took away, not the atrocities. When I walked back outside, all of the beauty
I had seen in the Tahoe area looked different to me when I saw it through the Native eyes.
I couldn’t shake the possibilities — what if I could help tell a story that conveyed this to others who
weren’t able to be there?
10 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
The second day was even more dramatic. The Stewart Indian School is beautiful. Majestic stone
buildings, gorgeous grounds. The testimony inside was heart wrenching — the buildings were built with
forced Native child labor. Slaves. The testimonies of physical and mental abuse were devastating. But
there were also surprising stories — of Native kids who grew up there with happy memories; of people
who met their husbands or wives there. I was, honestly, overwhelmed. I asked Christina — what could
a storyteller do with those things — the dissonant pieces to the larger narrative of trauma?
That’s when she told me a story that was for me, transformative, and that would become my “North
Star" on this incredible filmmaking journey. Natives have been asked to share their story over and over.
They are just distilled into a report that removes their humanity and sits on shelves. Because of that,
the reports historically have changed nothing. For this to be different; it couldn’t (just) be just tabulating
traumas. It had to be a story about resilience and the complexity of humanity that we all share.
Through philanthropic support, I’ve since spent over two years following the Truth and Healing Council
process. The most remarkable thing about those first two days of meeting is that I’ve had some version
of the experience — changing my worldview, challenging my assumptions, finding something inspiring
in the way people figure out to survive — over and over again. The work of the Office of Tribal Affairs
culminates in 2025 with a report, and the film I’ve been putting together will be completed to align with
that report. Hopefully, this report will be the start of a reckoning that California needs to have with its
history. And hopefully the film will help their findings to reach a larger audience, so they don’t sit on a
shelf like so many similar efforts have in the past.
Sources: Governor Gavin Newsom. June 18, 2019. Executive Order N-15-19. https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2019/06/6.18.19-Executive-Order.pdf. Also, Governor’s Office of Tribal Affairs. “About the California Truth and Healing
Council.” https://tribalaffairs.ca.gov/cthc/about/. Accessed March 4, 2025. Also, Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. 2023. “State
of California Social Innovation Impact Report: 2023.” Page 10. Also, Elena Chávez Quezada, Senior Advisor for Social Innovation,
Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. Written Testimony to the Commission. Pages 4-7. https://lhc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/
Chavez-Quezada-Testimony.pdf.
Advisor for Social Innovation Elena Chávez Quezada. for vulnerable populations during Covid-19.14 When
“One of the building blocks to trust is transparent partners identify common goals—such as addressing
and regular communication, which then creates housing shortages or supporting low-income
feedback loops that allow for course correction after workers—they are better positioned to co-create
the inevitable bumps in the road any partnership solutions that drive innovation and equity.
faces.”13
LEADERSHIP AND INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT
SHARED VALUES AND ALIGNED GOALS Visionary leadership and effective coordination
Successful partnerships prioritize alignment in mechanisms within government are significant in
values and objectives between philanthropic and facilitating partnerships. The Governor’s appointment
public sectors. These shared priorities ensure the of a senior advisor with a public-philanthropic
relevance and focus of initiatives, as seen in projects partnership portfolio is key in both signaling support
like the Homekey program, which provided housing at the highest echelon of state government, and in
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 11
supporting collaboration at scale and streamlining promising enough that Governor Newsom allocated
communication between state agencies and $30 million over three years in the state’s 2023
philanthropic organizations. Establishing liaisons budget to transform it into a permanent program.16
in key agencies has further institutionalized In fiscal year 2023-24, the program provided up to
partnerships, ensuring continuity and reducing six months of assistance to about 1,500 people.
dependency on individual leaders. The California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation will release a report on the program’s
ADDRESSING STRUCTURAL INEQUITIES
outcomes in 2026,17 at which point policymakers will
THROUGH CAPACITY BUILDING
make another decision on whether the program is
Successful partnerships also incorporate capacity
worth expanding.
building to empower local stakeholders and
address structural inequities. Programs like
BOOST Imperial Valley, which helps under-
Sometimes the most effective
resourced communities access federal, state, and
way to improve a government
local funding for infrastructure and community
development, underscore the importance of program is not to put more
equipping communities with the skills and technical
resources behind it, but instead
assistance needed to leverage funding opportunities
effectively.15 These efforts enhance the resilience and to change the policies that
self-sufficiency of local organizations while ensuring
are failing to produce positive
that resources reach those who need them most.
outcomes.” Kathleen Kelly
LEVERAGING FLEXIBLE RESOURCES TO
Janus, Professor, Stanford
INNOVATE
Philanthropic institutions bring flexibility to University
public partnerships, particularly their ability to
provide risk capital. Philanthropic funding fosters
SPEED AND NIMBLENESS IN TACKLING
experimentation and supports the piloting of ideas
CHALLENGES
that governments, constrained by budgetary and
Philanthropic organizations can operate faster than
systemic restrictions, may be unwilling or unable to
state government, which can face procedural delays
fund initially.
and administrative limitations. Partnerships that take
advantage of philanthropy’s agility can help bridge
One example is California’s “Returning Home
the gap between quick action and bureaucratic
Well Housing” program, which offers formerly-
change. For instance, the California Immigrant
incarcerated people housing, job training, mental
Resilience Fund addressed the immediate needs of
health, substance use disorder, and cash assistance
immigrant families during the COVID-19 pandemic
to aid their reentry into society. Tapping into
by providing financial support for vulnerable
American Rescue Plan funding for $22 million for
populations.18
short-term housing, California partnered with 20
national philanthropies to pilot this program in LIMITATIONS OF PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC
2020. Those philanthropies provided $20 million in PARTNERSHIPS
job training and health care assistance, along with Despite their recent success, public-philanthropic
$1,500 in monthly cash assistance to the 13,817 pilot partnerships are not the solution to every problem,
program participants. The pilot program was deemed witnesses testified. Partnerships cannot and should
12 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Public-Private Partnerships
While this report is the Commission’s first on public-philanthropic partnerships, the Commission
has discussed the value of public-private partnerships in prior studies. Most recently, in Equitable
Development Across California, the Commission found that public-private partnerships are an
effective tool in regional economic development. These partnerships foster innovation, advance
industrial clusters, and align job training with workforce needs.
Public-private partnerships additionally play a role in building regional capacity and promoting
inclusive economic development. Initiatives like Fresno DRIVE and the Inland Empire’s IEGO rely on
collaboration between civic leaders, community-based organizations, educational institutions and
the private sector; together, they help identify regional strengths, provide investment, and ensure
that community voices are included in economic planning. In turn, the state can better address
structural inequalities and more resilient economies.
not replace the government’s core functions of FURTHER INSTITUTIONALIZE PUBLIC-
providing public safety, basic social benefits, and PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS
education, they said.19 Partnerships cannot fix bad The role of senior advisor with a public-
government policy. “Sometimes the most effective philanthropic partnership portfolio is relatively
way to improve a government program is not to new, as are the philanthropic liaison officers at the
put more resources behind it,” wrote Stanford agency level. They have not yet been tested by a
Professor Kathleen Kelly Janus, who formerly served change in gubernatorial administration. Further
as Governor Newsom’s senior advisor for social institutionalizing public-philanthropic partnerships
innovation, “but instead to change the policies that is essential to protect the work that has already
are failing to produce positive outcomes.”20 Finally, been accomplished, and to ensure that public-
they cannot fill gaps in government funding.21 Public- philanthropic partnerships continue to flourish under
philanthropic partnerships can prove whether future administrations.
a policy idea is feasible or not, but it is up to the
government, not philanthropy, to implement a The Commission recommends that all future
successful pilot program to be expanded statewide. governors retain this position. While the structure
of the governor's office may vary with each
Opportunities for Improving administration, the Commission emphasizes the
Public-Philanthropic importance of preserving key competencies within
this role, including:
Partnerships
◊ Expertise in both state government and
Though California has made significant strides in
philanthropy, with the ability to effectively bridge
fostering public-philanthropic partnerships, there
and translate between the two sectors.
remains room to strengthen the state’s partnership
infrastructure.
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 13
Case Study: Saving California State Parks in the Aftermath
of the Great Recession
California’s state parks encompass approximately 1.6 million acres; the 340 miles of coastline, 970
miles of lake and river frontage, 5,200 miles of trails, nearly 3,200 historical buildings, and more
than 11,000 known archeological sites are among largest and most diverse holdings of any state
agency within the United States.
The state’s efforts to set aside land for preservation date back to the mid-1800s when President
Abraham Lincoln granted the fledgling state 20,000 acres in Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Big
Tree Grove – a gift California returned to the federal government in 1905 when, with only a single
ranger and the park’s being overrun with private ranchers, the state was forced to concede it
couldn’t protect the park.
PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS FROM THE BEGINNING
Undeterred, preservationists began raising money and eliciting permission from the state
legislature to purchase historic sites. In the late 1920s, the state’s park system was born when the
Legislature established a commission to oversee a new park system and voters passed a bond
raising $6 million to match another $6 million in private giving to buy and develop state parks,
thus entwining philanthropy and state parks from the very beginning.
CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION
In the late 1960s, California’s state parks were facing drastic budget cuts under Governor Ronald
Reagan at the same time that the departmental leaders began to understand that preserving the
land was not enough: Interpretation, education, professional training, science-based resource
management and expansion into urban areas were needed for Californians to be able to fully
engage with the parklands set aside for them.
In 1969, Parks Director William Penn Mott Jr. created the California State Parks Foundation to
partner with the state in protecting and preserving the parks. Early on, the foundation raised
money to grow the state parks system. In more recent years, the foundation has focused on
stewardship of existing parks, expanding park access to all Californians, enhancing parks’ climate
resilience, improving park operations, and advocating for the parks to and educating government
officials, voters, and the general public. It has more than 70,000 members and has raised more
than $300 million for state parks.
IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE GREAT RECESSION, 2008 TO 2012
In the aftermath of the Great Recession, the Department of Parks and Recreation repeatedly faced
the prospect of closing state parks due to California’s chronic budget shortfalls. In January 2008,
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed closing 48 parks to help bridge the state’s budget gap.
14 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
The Legislature rejected the idea. In June 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger proposed closing 220
state parks. He backed off the proposal after reportedly receiving 135,000 letters, telephone calls
and emails opposing the closures.
The continued threat of closures prompted a coalition led by the California State Parks Foundation
to put a voter initiative on the November 2010 ballot to address both the park system challenges
and raise money for the state’s conservation and habitat preservation missions. Proposition
21, the State Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust Fund Act, called for an $18 annual vehicle
registration fee that would produce an estimated $500 million a year. In return for paying the
license fee, park visitors with California plates would get free admission to state parks. The
revenues would have removed the need for a General Fund contribution to state parks.
Voters, going to the polls after 10 consecutive months in which statewide unemployment
exceeded 12 percent, rejected the proposition. Subsequent surveys and interviews by the
initiative’s backers suggested that voters felt financially pressed, were leery of any new fees or
taxes, and lacked confidence in assurances that fees for parks could be successfully sequestered
from the broader budget. Critics called it ballot-box budgeting that would further tie the hands of
the Legislature as it grappled with ways to reduce state spending.
Governor Jerry Brown, taking office shortly after the measure’s defeat, reduced the department’s
General Fund allocation by $11 million, and called for a further $11 million reduction for Fiscal
Year 2012-13. In response, the department listed 70 parks it said it could no longer keep open
under the existing operating structure and asked for proposals that could help keep parks open
under different arrangements.
The closure list, issued in May 2011, generated dismay from park visitors and communities
dependent on tourism. It also sparked political controversy, as more of the targeted parks were
located in Northern California. The department said it was trying to keep more parks open in
areas near major population centers. This put the less-populated north coast at a disadvantage,
especially given its proportionately greater number of state parks.
The Legislature passed AB 42 (Huffman), permitting the department to allow up to 20 parks to
be fully operated by a nonprofit organization. The law allowed the department to enter into an
unlimited number of contracts with nonprofits for less-than-full operation arrangements. Though
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 15
the California State Parks Foundation sponsored the legislation, it and other foundations such as
Save the Redwoods League were not interested in operating a park or using foundation money
to subsidize operations. They did, however, raise money for restoration of deteriorated facilities
and degraded habitat. AB 42 opened opportunities not previously available, setting in motion a
series of experiments of what kinds of alternative operating arrangements might work, in what
conditions, and for how long.
The temporary rescue agreements took a variety of forms. The National Park Service stepped in to
share resources that kept two Marin County parks and Del Norte Redwoods open, devoting added
revenue from an increase in parking fees at Golden Gate National Recreation Area sites to their
support. A group of Silicon Valley benefactors raised money to keep open Henry Coe State Park,
the largest state park in Northern California. The City of Whittier allocated $30,000 to keep Pio Pico
State Historic Park from closing. Regional park districts in Sonoma and Napa counties took over
management of several state parks. In Colusa County, the City of Colusa agreed to manage the
local state recreation area.
Local groups like Team Standish in Mendocino County and Valley of the Moon History Association
and Team Sugarloaf in Sonoma County took over operations at several more state parks. The
California State Parks Foundation, Save the Redwoods League and Sempervirens Fund channeled
hundreds of thousands of dollars raised from foundations and other philanthropists to parks and
to assist local associations with their efforts.
In Mono County, the department took the Mono Lake Tufa State Natural Preserve off the closure
list after a group of environmentalists and preserve supporters, including the Bodie Foundation,
and the Mono Lake Committee, discovered a simple, innovative way to keep it open. The solution
was in the parking lot of an old marina popular with preserve visitors. Under its agreement with
the state, the Bodie Foundation began to run a parking concession expected to generate $111,000
a year by charging $3 per vehicle, enough to keep the preserve open. The foundation had an
existing relationship with the department through operating contracts for the museum and
bookstore at Bodie State Historic Park.
Ultimately, the result in 2012 was a citizen, community, and government rescue of nearly all 70
state parks proposed for closure.
Sources: California State Parks. “Natural Resource Management.” https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=22197. Accessed March 4,
2025. Also, California State Parks. “About Us.” https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=91. Accessed March 4, 2025. Also, California
State Parks Foundation. “Our History.” https://www.calparks.org/50years/ourhistory. Accessed March 4, 2025. Also, California State
Parks Foundation. “Strategic Plan: 2024-2027.” https://www.calparks.org/strategicplan. Accessed March 4, 2025. Also, Little Hoover
Commission. March 2013. “Beyond Crisis: Recapturing Excellence in California’s State Park System.” Pages 1-18. https://lhc.ca.gov/
wp-content/uploads/Reports/215/Report215.pdf. With special thanks to Jim Wasserman.
16 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
◊ Direct access to the Governor, coupled with
a comprehensive understanding of the
administration’s priorities.
Californians Dedicated
◊ Facilitation of cross-sector collaboration and the to Education Foundation
cultivation of trust among stakeholders.
In 2011, the Californians Dedicated
◊ Openness to engaging with the philanthropic
to Education Foundation was created
community.
to support the state’s Department of
◊ Support for agency philanthropic liaisons in
Education. It has raised more than $32
developing and sustaining partnerships.
million to support the state’s public
education system, which serves 6 million
A commitment to transparency, sustainability, equity,
children. The foundation positions
and ensuring the inclusion of stakeholders from
itself as a resource hub for family and
vulnerable and underrepresented communities.
community engagement, provides support
Recommendation 1: The State of California should for teacher residency and apprenticeship
fund and make permanent within the executive programs, fosters collaboration among
branch a senior advisor position responsible for district labor-management teams, and
public-philanthropic partnerships. runs an annual symposium on integrating
science, technology, engineering, art, and
a) As part of their responsibilities, this
mathematics (STEAM) into classroom
person should liaise with the Attorney
curricula.
General’s Office on messaging with newly-
formed foundations to ensure they know Since its creation, the foundation has
they can work with government. supported nearly 100 local education
and university residency partnerships;
Just as ensuring the continuity of the work of the
roughly two-thirds of those graduates are
senior advisor is critical to the future success of
people of color. It has provided capacity
public-philanthropic partnerships, so is expanding
building for 10 school districts, and has
the public-philanthropic partnership infrastructure
convened 15,000 educators to improve
at lower levels of government. The senior advisor
STEAM learning. It has engaged more than
cannot do all the work alone.
175 school districts as part of its labor
management initiative, and communicates
Recommendation 2: The State of California should
about the state’s educational standards
continue its efforts to establish a partnership
through a million-strong network of state
liaison in major departments and agencies.
association members.
Public-philanthropic partnership resources currently
Sources: Californians Dedicated to Education
are centralized within the executive branch. Foundation. “Programs.” https://cdefoundation.org/
Witnesses pointed out that the de-centralized nature programs/. Accessed April 1, 2025. Also, Californians
Dedicated to Education Foundation. “Our Vision.”
of the state legislature made it difficult to collaborate
https://cdefoundation.org/who-we-are/. Accessed April
with that body or even know who to approach with
1, 2025.
questions.22 Creating a centralized point of contact
for philanthropy in the state legislature could serve
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 17
both philanthropy and members who have questions Recommendation 4: The State of California
about partnership opportunities in their district and should create a formal monitoring and evaluation
related topics. This position ideally would be housed and reporting process located outside of the
in the office of the Assembly Speaker or the Senate Office of the Governor for public-philanthropic
President pro tempore, or in the Senate Office of partnerships.
Research.
a) As part of this process, the state should
Recommendation 3: The state legislature should collect demographic data on which
create a centralized point of reference on public- Californians are benefiting from the
philanthropic partnerships, both to communicate partnership.
with the philanthropic community and to
b) Additionally, the state should study the
communicate with the administration.
ways in which outside organizations partner
IMPACT DATA — EXPAND MONITORING & with the state to see if some models lead
EVALUATION
to greater efficiencies and/or impact than
Measuring the cumulative impact of public-private
others.
partnerships in California is difficult. Although
the state publishes an annual impact report and
convenes an annual philanthropy summit, there
appears to be no systemic data-driven measurement
of the overall results. Descriptions of the impact of
public-private partnerships are often limited to the
case-by-case results of each program, such as those
provided earlier in this report.23
To address this, the Commission recommends that
the state formalize a monitoring and evaluation
program for all of the public-philanthropic
partnerships in which the state engages, then make
the results easily accessible to Californians. As many
of these partnerships already have monitoring and
evaluation built in, this need not be an onerous
undertaking. Monitoring and evaluation would
generate data to prove the overall effectiveness
of partnerships, and also allow the state and its
partners to make course corrections if the evidence
shows the initiative is not making the expected
impact. The state should also use this opportunity
to show it is helping traditionally underserved and
underrepresented Californians, and to apply lessons
learned to future partnerships.
18 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Summary of Recommendations
Recommendation 1: The State of California should
fund and make permanent within the executive
branch a senior advisor position responsible for
public-philanthropic partnerships.
a) As part of their responsibilities, this person
should liaise with the Attorney General’s Office
on messaging with newly-formed foundations
to ensure they know they can work with
government.
Recommendation 2: The State of California should
continue its efforts to establish a partnership liaison
in major departments and agencies.
Recommendation 3: The state legislature should
create a centralized point of reference on public-
philanthropic partnerships, both to communicate
with the philanthropic community and to
communicate with the administration.
Recommendation 4: The State of California should
create a formal monitoring and evaluation and
reporting process located outside of the Office of the
Governor for public-philanthropic partnerships.
a) As part of this process, the state should
collect demographic data on which Californians
are benefiting from the partnership.
b) Additionally, the state should study the ways
in which outside organizations partner with
the state to see if some models lead to greater
efficiencies and/or impact than others.
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 19
Notes
1. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. State of 10. Elena Chávez Quezada, Senior Advisor for Social
California Social Innovation Impact Report: Innovation, Office of California Governor Gavin
2024. Page 2. https://lhc.ca.gov/wp-content/ Newsom. November 21, 2024. Written testimony
uploads/2024-Impact-Report_Newsom.pdf. to the Commission.
2. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. See endnote 11. Elena Chávez Quezada. See endnote 10.
1. Page 4.
12. Abby Snay, Deputy Secretary for Workforce
3. James M. Ferris. March 2021. A Generation of Strategy, California Labor and Workforce
Impact: The Evolution of Philanthropy over the Development Agency. December 13, 2024.
Past 25 Years. Page 8. Available here: https:// Written testimony to the Commission. Pages 1-2.
cppp.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/A-
13. Elena Chávez Quezada. See endnote 10. Page 1.
Generation-of-Impact.pdf. Accessed February 3,
2025.
14. Kathleen Kelly Janus. See endnote 5. Page 42.
4. James M. Ferris. See endnote 3. Pages 2-5.
15. Elena Chávez Quezada. See endnote 10. Page 2.
5. Kathleen Kelly Janus. Summer 2024. “Effective
16. Kathleen Kelly Janus. See endnote 5. Page 40.
government Demands Partnership.” Stanford
Social Innovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/ 17. Legislative Analyst’s Office. February 25, 2025.
entry/public-private-partnerships-innovation- “The 2025-26 Budget: California Department of
scale [subscription required]. Page 41. Available Corrections and Rehabilitation.” Available here:
without pagination as written testimony at https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4986.
https://lhc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2.- Accessed February 27, 2025.
Janus-How-Public-Private-Partnerships-Unlock-
Innovation-at-Scale.pdf. 18. Kathleen Kelly Janus. See endnote 5. Pages 43-44.
6. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. 2023. “State 19. Kathleen Kelly Janus. See endnote 5. Page 41.
of California Social Innovation Impact Report:
20. Kathleen Kelly Janus. See endnote 5. Page 41.
2023.” Page 6. https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2024/01/2023-California-Social-
21. Kathleen Kelly Janus. See endnote 5. Page 41.
Innovation-Impact-Report.pdf.
22. Don J. Howard. October 17, 2024. Written
7. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. See endnote
testimony to the Commission. Page 5.
6. Page 11.
https://lhc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/4.-
Irvine-Written-testimony-on-public-private-
8. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. See endnote
partnerships_Don-J.-Howard-of-The-James-Irvine-
6. Page 8.
Foundation_10.11.24.pdf.
9. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. See endnote
23. Elena Chávez Quezada. See endnote 10. Page 4.
6. Page 19. Also, California Wildfire and Forest
Resilience Task Force. “Planscape.” https://
wildfiretaskforce.org/planscape/. Accessed March
7, 2025.
20 | LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION
Little Hoover Commission Members
CHAIR PEDRO NAVA | Santa Barbara JOSÉ ATILIO HERNÁNDEZ | Burbank
Appointed by Assembly Speaker Pérez in April 2013, then Appointed by Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon
reappointed by Speakers Rendon in 2017 and 2021 and in April 2023. Founder and CEO of IDEATE California, a
Rivas in 2024. Elected Chair in March 2014. Government public relations and policy management firm. Also, founder
relations advisor. Former State Assemblymember from and Board Chairman of ideateLABS. Former Director for
2004 to 2010, civil litigator, deputy district attorney and External Affairs and Community Relations for ConnectEd:
member of the state Coastal Commission. The California Center for College and Career.
VICE CHAIR ANTHONY CANNELLA | Ceres JASON JOHNSON | Napa
Appointed by the Senate Rules Committee in March 2022. Appointed by Governor Newsom in June 2023. Member
Elected Vice Chair in July 2023. Civil engineer and principal of the Land Trust of Napa County Board of Trustees and
with Northstar Engineering Group. Former State Senator Horary Commander of Travis Air Force Base. Former
from 2010 to 2018. Previously served on the Ceres City Managing Partner at Founders Den. Founder and former
Council and was twice elected mayor of that city. CEO at August Home Inc.
DION ARONER | Berkeley GAYLE MILLER | Sacramento
Appointed by the Senate Rules Committee in April Appointed by Governor Newsom in January 2025. Currently
2019. Partner for Aroner, Jewel, and Ellis. Former State Managing Director at Brookfield Asset Management.
Assemblymember from 1996 to 2002, chief of staff for Previously served as Senior Counselor on Infrastructure
Assemblymember Tom Bates, social worker for Alameda and Clean Energy Finance for Governor Newsom and Chief
County, and the first female president of Service Employees Deputy of Policy at the California Department of Finance.
International Union 535.
SENATOR ROGER NIELLO | Fair Oaks
DAVID BEIER | San Francisco Appointed by the Senate Rules Committee in February
Appointed by Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. in June 2014 2025. Elected in 2022 to represent Senate District 6, which
and reappointed in January 2018. Managing director of encompasses portions of Placer County, including cities
Bay City Capital. Former senior officer of Genentech and such as Auburn, Granite Bay, and Lincoln, as well as parts
Amgen, and counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives of Sacramento County, including cities such as Antelope,
Committee on the Judiciary. Folsom, Orangevale, and Rancho Cordova.
SENATOR CHRISTOPHER CABALDON | West ASSEMBLYMEMBER LIZ ORTEGA | San Leandro
Sacramento Appointed by Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon
Appointed by the Senate Rules Committee in February in March 2023. Elected in November 2022 to represent
2025. Elected in 2024 to represent Senate District 3, which Assembly District 20. Represents Hayward, San Leandro,
encompasses portions of Contra Costa, Napa, Solano, most of Union City, portions of Dublin and Pleasanton, and
Sonoma, Yolo, and Sacramento Counties. several unincorporated communities.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER PHILLIP CHEN | Yorba Linda JANNA SIDLEY | Los Angeles
Appointed by Speaker of the Assembly Anthony Rendon Appointed by Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. in April
in October 2021. Elected in November 2016 to represent 2016 and reappointed in February 2020. Partner at Ichor
District 55. Represents portions of Los Angeles, Orange Strategies and appointed to the Board of the Los Angeles
and San Bernardino counties and the cities of Brea, Chino City Employee Retirement System (“LACERS”). Former
Hills, Diamond Bar, La Habra, Industry, Placentia, Rowland general counsel at the Port of Los Angeles and city attorney
Heights, Walnut, West Covina and Yorba Linda. at the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office.
GIL GARCETTI | Los Angeles Full biographies are available on the Commission’s
Appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom in November website at www.lhc.ca.gov.
2021. Professional photographer and author of ten books.
Former Los Angeles County District Attorney, teaching
Fellow at Harvard University’s Kennedy School, and
president of the California Science Center Foundation’s
Board of Trustees.
STRENGHTENING PUBLIC-PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERSHIPS | 21
“DEMOCRACY ITSELF IS A PROCESS OF CHANGE, AND
SATISFACTION AND COMPLACENCY ARE ENEMIES OF
GOOD GOVERNMENT.”
By Governor Edmund G. “Pat” Brown,
addressing the inaugural meeting of the Little Hoover Commission,
April 24,1962, Sacramento, California
Milton Marks Commission on California State
Government Organization and Economy
www.lhc.ca.gov