An Analysis of the Barnes Foundation’s Loss as an Example

Case Study - The Art of the Steal

A short five miles away from the center of Philadelphia was the location of The Barnes Foundation. The Barnes Foundation, founded 1922 by Albert C. Barnes, consisted of many of the most valuable and important collections of Post-Impressionist art along with Early Modern art. This collection was considered to be the world's best collection of art and was valued at a minimum of 25 billion dollars. This particular collection was so rare that massive museums throughout America did not even compare to that of the Barnes Foundation. The museum world had almost no way of acquiring paintings from Barnes as many pieces from his collection were unaffordable for museums with the potential of being unaffordable to some nations.

The space in which the art was held was immaculate, consisting of colorful walls, intimately spaced rooms, with art consisting of paintings as well as pieces of furniture. One of the most important purposes of The Barnes Foundation was to educate others in the form of a school. In fear of the collection being stolen by the state as had happened to a nearby collection in the past, Barnes worked closely with his lawyers to create a will preventing this. The will included strict rules against ever relocating the collection or any of its paintings away from the original location and to serve primarily as a school for art criticism, teaching of art, and art appreciation rather than a museum open to the public.

Order custom essay An Analysis of the Barnes Foundation’s Loss as an Example with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

After the passing of Albert Barnes, many fought to keep the school alive and out of the hands of the public. Generations of various trustees and presidents of The Barnes Foundation passed. Richard Glanton became the president and created the idea of selling certain pieces of art in order to restore the rest of the collection. As many rejected this idea, Richard Glanton involved the Philadelphia Inquirer to visit the building in which the art was held and write a story. The building had a few rusted and leaky pipes and the state was able to go around Barnes's will by saying that the art needed to be moved out of the inadequate building. The art collection was moved to various states, countries, and then back to Philadelphia where it became a very popular cite nationally while Glanton became exceedingly famous.

There were not necessarily any clear legal violations in the case but there were many powerful individuals who greatly influenced the outcomes of the Barnes collection. These individuals were so effective mainly because of their wealth power and because they seemed to tap into the group of people who opposed Barnes. Although there were not many legal violations, there were countless unethical decisions made. One of the most obvious unethical decisions that was made was The addition of Philadelphia Foundation board members in order to outnumber those from the Lincoln University. This was one of the largest turning points in the case and those who were involved in changing the number of board members were most likely aware of the potential future impact of the collection.

The next unethical matter from the documentary was the way in which Richard Glanton went about initially proposing to sell the art for a profit. He was unethical in the way he portrayed the reasoning as to why he wanted to sell the art. The next step he took towards gaining from the art was when he invited a reported from the Philadelphia Inquirer to report on the condition of the building rather than taking steps towards repairing the potential hazards. Unfortunately, the state was able to rule out the portion of Dr. Barnes' will by stating that the location in which the art was stored was not fit.

Another unethical point that was presented in the documentary was the idea that many individuals acted on grudges towards Dr. Barnes rather than a genuine concern for what was right for the foundation. It was unfortunate that many of those opposed to Dr. Barnes ended up taking those negative feelings into the destruction of the school he founded. In the article entitled What Should a Billionaire Give? There is much speculation of the motives for insanely rich people to give such massive donations towards a cause and why they do not give more than they already do. In the case of Albert C.

Barnes and The Barnes Foundation, it seems as though he literally gave his all to the foundation from the way it was portrayed in the documentary. This may the reason for why so many people loathed him; The fact that he was so invested in his cause to the point that he patrolled the school with abnormal policies which lead people to become contrary to the foundation entirely.

The fact that the foundation was considered to be a nonprofit could have been one of the biggest reasons for the unfavorable outcome of the case. A nonprofit must exist for the public needs in order to keep legal 501-C3 tax status (IRS, 2016). Many people could argue that having this public responsibility may be determined by how many people can be involved in this art. On the opposing side, a public responsibility may mean to keep the organization in operation just the way it was organized. This matter of public responsibility may be one of the largest differences in how the nonprofit organization was treated in comparison to how a private company would have been treated.

The other factor that played a huge role in the loss of the Barnes Foundation was the changing and adding of board members. The documentary discusses the idea that in the private sector, this board alteration is common. In many ways, the nonprofit was treated as a private company and became somewhat of a pushover because of the lack of organization and power behind the nonprofit. In my opinion, a private company would have had a stronger force of individuals and funds fighting this battle. Unfortunately those who eventually became in charge of the Barnes Foundation lost sight of the passion from which the organization was founded upon.

An aspect that really laid the blueprint for The Barnes Foundation was Albert C. Barnes' vision. The changes that occurred among the organization after the passing of Dr. Barnes were difficult for those making the changes because of various individuals who fought for what they believed was right according to the vision of Dr. Barnes.

The Barnes Foundation also had a very prestigious reputation worldwide possibly because of the way he ran his foundation, not open to the public. The brand, The Barnes Foundation, could have had endless potential due to this reputation. Although there was a an overwhelming dedication from those originally involved in the foundation, there was no real financial stability or financial plan explaining what was to happen to the collection financially after Dr. Barnes passed away.

Nonprofit organizations typically should have a clear account of finances and concise account of transparency (National Council of Nonprofits, 2016) According to the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, a nonprofit, "has a responsibility to ensure that its assets are used solely for the benefit of the organization and not for personal or other gains.

To carry out this duty, an organization should have a clear conflict of interest policy that is annually signed by board members and key staff and actively enforced by the officers of the board" (Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, 2014). Without these strict financial guidelines and clear transparency, the newer presidents of the foundation ended up doing what they pleased in terms of finances. These actions were justified by showing a small portion of interest in the foundation itself. The nonprofit was rich in assets but poor in financial management.

There was an excellent capacity for greatness within the school but it lacked a plan consisting of how this capacity would be carried out. Aside from initial passion and understanding of how and why the organization was created, there was no real stability for a long-term school. The loss of the school was mainly lead by corrupt leaders and others who carried generational grudges towards Dr. Barnes. For these above reasons, the will of Albert C. Barnes did not hold up against those who sought to relocate and repurpose one of the most prestigious art collections in the world.

References

1. Minnesota Council of Nonprofits. (2014). Financial management. Principles and practices for nonprofit excellence. Web. November 8, 2016.
2. Singer, Peter. (December 16, 2006). What Should a Billionaire Give - and What Should You? The New York Times. Web. November 11, 2016.
3. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). (June 28, 2016). Exemption Requirements - 501(c)(3) Organizations. Web. November 12, 2016.
4. National Council of Nonprofits. (2016). Nonprofit Annual Reports. Web. November 12, 2016.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer