# Cleveland Foundation Model *Concept: the community-foundation form devised in Cleveland in 1914 and carried into Minnesota through bank trust departments* The **Cleveland Foundation Model** is the [[Community foundation]] form devised by [[Frederick Goff]] at the [[Cleveland Trust Company]] on January 2, 1914. According to the footnoted master of [[How Minnesota Got Here]], the form spread as a product line of bank trust departments, which is how it reached Minnesota. Twelve community foundations were founded in 1915. In 1920 the [[American Bankers Association]]'s Trust Company Section created a permanent Committee on Community Trusts.[^1] In Minnesota the form is carried chiefly by the two largest community foundations, the [[Minneapolis Foundation]] (EIN 41-6029402, founded 1915) and the [[Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation]] (EIN 41-6031510). On a stewardship basis they hold roughly $3.1 billion and grant $230 million a year.[^2][^3] The project's allocator ledger pairs the model with a federal tax regulation, 26 C.F.R. § 1.170A-9, in connection with its variance-power design.[^4] The project's master files the foundations under a section it heads "the private mirror." It describes them as the private layer of the same apparatus whose public layer includes [[Minn. Stat. § 43A.191]].[^5] The United States' Title VII complaint against Minnesota, filed January 14, 2026 and pending, cites that statute eight times.[^6][^7] ## Origin The master's note [28] dates the model to Goff's work at the Cleveland Trust Company on January 2, 1914. It records the 1915 foundings and the 1920 creation of the ABA Trust Company Section's permanent Committee on Community Trusts. The note cites the [[Cleveland Foundation]]'s centennial as its source and marks the facts as primary-confirmed. The pack carries no URL for that centennial source.[^1] ## Minnesota community foundations The Minneapolis Foundation was founded in 1915. The Saint Paul Foundation, founded in 1940, merged with the [[Minnesota Community Foundation]] on January 1, 2020, forming the Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation.[^2] The two foundations' assets are reported on two bases. On the stewardship basis the master gives roughly $3.1 billion. The EIN-level Form 990s show about $2.8 billion. The master attributes the difference to partner-foundation assets under management and records this basis distinction as confirmed in validation.[^2] The Minneapolis Foundation's FY2017 Form 990, posted on the foundation's own site, is the filing the project lists as that foundation's self-description of its allocator role. The pack does not reproduce the figures in that filing.[^3] The master widens the count to what it calls the Minnesota apex layer, adding the McKnight, Bush, Northwest Area and Otto Bremer foundations. On the latest filings available to the master, it computes this layer at $9 billion. Its line items are: - McKnight: about $2.71 billion - Bush: about $1.45 billion - Northwest Area: about $0.55 billion - Bremer: about $1.42 billion - plus the two community foundations Validation confirmed the founding dates. It placed the aggregate at about $8.9–9.6 billion, with the range depending on book or fair-market basis. These figures are as of the master's sources, which the pack does not date.[^2] ## Federal tax regulation The project's allocator ledger lists 26 C.F.R. § 1.170A-9 as the federal rule bearing on the model's [[Variance power]] design and private-allocator role. The ledger cites the 2010 edition published on GovInfo.[^4] The pack does not carry the regulation's text, and this article does not characterize its terms. ## Place in the project's record In *How Minnesota Got Here*, the foundations appear under §ALLOCATOR. The master calls this "the private mirror" and "the layer the report never reached." Its thesis has three parts: - The public architecture "switched its controls off in writing, leaving a history line each time." - The private mirror "never had the controls to switch." - The two layers exchange personnel, money and functions. These are the project's analytic claims. The documents in this pack establish the foundations' form, founding dates and reported scale. They do not document the exchanges themselves.[^5] The §ALLOCATOR section follows §4.7, which reads four Minnesota instruments together: - the [[Duluth model]], which drew a National Institute of Justice null finding in June 2003 (NCJ 195079); - [[Comparable worth]] (1982 and 1984); - the women's-economic-status monitoring organ (1976); - § 43A.191 (1985).[^5][^8] The master's note records that the NIJ finding is contested. Gondolf's multi-site evaluation reports reductions where courts reinforce the program, and Duluth's defenders dispute whether the Broward sites met Duluth fidelity. The note states that its point is the State's non-engagement with a federal null signal, not a final efficacy verdict.[^8] NIJ's CrimeSolutions program maintains a rated-practice page for Duluth Model batterer intervention.[^9] The monitoring organ was created by Laws 1976, chapter 337, approved April 19, 1976.[^8] It became the [[Council on the Economic Status of Women]] (1976), then a Commission (1983), then the [[Office on the Economic Status of Women]] (2005, Minn. Stat. § 3.303). It was defunded in 2017 and revived in 2023.[^10] The master dates a "statutory construction schedule" to 1976, 1979, 1982, 1984 and 1985 and assigns it to "two parties, both chambers." It describes its own conclusion as "a claim about instruments and incentives, not about any person's mind."[^5] ## The federal action and the State's statute On January 14, 2026, the [[United States Department of Justice]] filed [[United States v. State of Minnesota (0:26-cv-00273)]] in the District of Minnesota. The suit is brought under [[Title VII]] of the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]]. The complaint rests on the statute's text: it cites § 43A.191 eight times, including subdivision 3(c)'s requirement that an agency explain the reason for hiring a non-affirmative candidate.[^6][^7] DOJ's Office of Public Affairs announced the filing in release No. 26-21, titled *United States Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Minnesota's 'Affirmative Action' Regime*. Attorney General Pamela Bondi certified the case as a matter of general public importance.[^11] The case is pending, and this article does not adjudicate it. The U.S. government has used the word "regime" for governments it opposes. The [[Iraq Liberation Act]] of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-338) states a policy of supporting efforts to remove "the regime headed by Saddam Hussein."[^12] The project's catalogue of U.S.-government "regime" usages (*How Minnesota Got Here*, note 40) finds Minnesota the only U.S. state so described.[^12] The suit was filed after [[Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services]], 605 U.S. 303 (2025). In that case the Supreme Court held that Title VII's disparate-treatment provision "draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs." It also rejected the Sixth Circuit's heightened "background circumstances" rule for majority-group plaintiffs.[^13] The project's Time Table records the statute's maintenance across administrations. In 2003, Governor Tim Pawlenty proposed no changes to § 43A.191.[^14] On January 7, 2019, Keith Ellison was sworn in as the 30th [[Minnesota Attorney General]]. His announced priorities were wage theft, drug prices and consumer protection; they did not include a review of § 43A.191.[^15] ## In the Minnesota record ### Who - Frederick Goff, at the Cleveland Trust Company, devised the form.[^1] - The American Bankers Association's Trust Company Section created the permanent Committee on Community Trusts.[^1] - The Minneapolis Foundation and the Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation are Minnesota's two largest community foundations.[^2] ### What - A community-foundation form that reached Minnesota as a trust-department product line.[^1] ### When - January 2, 1914: Goff devises the form in Cleveland.[^1] - 1915: twelve community foundations are founded, among them the Minneapolis Foundation.[^1][^2] - 1920: the ABA Trust Company Section creates the Committee on Community Trusts.[^1] - 1940: the Saint Paul Foundation is founded.[^2] - January 1, 2020: the Saint Paul Foundation merges with the Minnesota Community Foundation.[^2] ### Where - Cleveland, at the Cleveland Trust Company, for the origin. Minneapolis and Saint Paul for the two largest Minnesota carriers.[^1][^2] ### How much - Roughly $3.1 billion held by the two largest community foundations on the stewardship basis, or about $2.8 billion on the EIN-level 990s.[^2] - $230 million granted by the two each year.[^2] - About $9 billion for the apex layer; validation range $8.9–9.6 billion.[^2] ## See also - [[Cleveland Foundation]] - [[Community foundation]] - [[Variance power]] - [[Minn. Stat. § 43A.191]] - [[Minnesota]] ## Notes [^1]: *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), note [28] and §ALLOCATOR text — Cleveland Foundation Model devised by Goff at Cleveland Trust Co., Jan. 2, 1914; twelve community foundations founded 1915; ABA Trust Company Section permanent Committee on Community Trusts, 1920; source given as Cleveland Foundation centennial, marked primary-confirmed. (Validated passage; no URL in pack.) [^2]: *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), "The scale and the form," note [27] — EINs, founding dates, Jan. 1, 2020 merger, $3.1B stewardship vs. ~$2.8B EIN-level 990s, $230M annual grants, apex-layer line items and ~$8.9–9.6B validation range. (Validated passage; no URL in pack.) [^3]: Minneapolis Foundation, *FY2017 Form 990* (posted 2017) — the foundation's own filing, listed by the project as its allocator self-description. http://www.minneapolisfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/TMF_FY2017_Form990.pdf [^4]: Office of the Federal Register (GovInfo), *Code of Federal Regulations, Title 26, § 1.170A-9* (2010 ed.) — the federal rule the project's allocator ledger lists for the model's variance-power design. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2010-title26-vol3/pdf/CFR-2010-title26-vol3-sec1-170A-9.pdf [^5]: *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), §4.7 and §ALLOCATOR — the four instruments, the construction schedule, and the "private mirror" thesis. (Validated passage; no URL in pack.) [^6]: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, *Complaint, United States v. State of Minnesota*, No. 0:26-cv-00273 (D. Minn. filed Jan. 14, 2026) — Title VII action citing Minn. Stat. § 43A.191 eight times, including subd. 3(c). https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1423361/dl [^7]: Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, *Minn. Stat. § 43A.191* — text and history of the statute. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/43A.191 [^8]: *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), note [26] — NIJ null finding (June 2003, NCJ 195079) and its contestation; Laws 1976 c 337, approved April 19, 1976; § 43A.191 (1985). (Validated passage; the note's own NIJ link is not in the pack.) [^9]: National Institute of Justice, *CrimeSolutions rated practice: Duluth Model batterer intervention* — NIJ rating page for the program. https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedpractices/17 [^10]: *The Instrument No One Will Name* (densified, 2026-06-18), note [26] — Council (1976) → Commission (1983) → Office on the Economic Status of Women (2005, Minn. Stat. § 3.303); defunded 2017, revived 2023. (Validated passage; no URL in pack.) [^11]: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, *United States Department of Justice Files Lawsuit Against Minnesota's 'Affirmative Action' Regime*, release No. 26-21 (Jan. 14, 2026) — announcement of the suit; Attorney General Bondi's certification of general public importance. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/united-states-department-justice-files-lawsuit-against-minnesotas-affirmative-action-regime [^12]: U.S. Congress, *Iraq Liberation Act of 1998*, Pub. L. 105-338 — policy to support removal of "the regime headed by Saddam Hussein"; the catalogue finding is the project's (*How Minnesota Got Here*, note 40). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-105publ338/pdf/PLAW-105publ338.pdf [^13]: Supreme Court of the United States, *Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services*, 605 U.S. 303 (2025) — holding on Title VII disparate treatment; rejection of the "background circumstances" rule. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1039_c0n2.pdf [^14]: Time Table row TL-0728 (2003), citing Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, *Minn. Stat. § 43A.191* — Pawlenty proposes no changes to § 43A.191. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/43A.191 [^15]: Time Table row TL-0871 (Jan. 7, 2019), citing Minnesota Attorney General, *Office biography* — Ellison sworn in as 30th Attorney General; announced priorities. https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/AGBio.asp