Last week the California Assembly passed a bill that would require big foundations ($250 million in assets and more) to disclose the race, gender and sexual orientation of their board, staff, and even grantees and business contracts. The bill is now headed to the State Senate. The Chronicle of Philanthropy ($$) outlines what is included in the bill.

• The number of grants and percentage of dollars going to organizations where at least 50 percent of the board, of staff members, are members of ethnic minorities, or are lesbians, gays, bisexuals, or transgender people.
• A breakdown of the number of grants and percentage of dollars that go to organizations that serve different ethnic groups or sexual orientations, as well as the percentage of contracts awarded to businesses owned by members of those groups.

Reportedly, the measure was put forth by the Greenlining Institute, a public-policy organization in Berkeley that says foundations are too secretive about their giving and not enough awards go to organizations led by minorities. Many have come out in opposition, arguing that it would result in burdensome reporting requirements, and violate privacy rights.

For example this LA Times opinion piece claimed that if the Bush administration were to propose such a measure; "The criticism would be swift and unambiguous: This is absurdly intrusive and a violation of privacy. Foundations would organize to oppose any such legislation. . . . Imagine being the employee who has to ask each co-worker about his or her sexual identity and history. Many of these foundations have relatively small staffs; there won't be many secrets if this bill becomes law."

An editorial in the Wall Street Journal reports that the Greenlining Institute has already begun lobbying House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) for Congressional hearings. Orson Aguilar, associate director of the Greenlining Institute, was quoted in the Chronicle of Philanthropy article to say this "is just the first step in the group's plans to get lawmakers involved. 'We're definitely going to be putting pressure on Congress and the new [president] to look at this,' he said."