Mass. magnanimity

GOOD NEWS: Massachusetts is not a state of stingy tightwads after all. A new Boston Foundation study debunks the notion that the state lags in charitable giving. But while cleaning up the state's reputation for generosity is nice, people still face the same challenge: how much to give, where, and why.

The Boston Foundation study challenges the Generosity Index, an analysis of Internal Revenue Service data launched in 1997 that consistently places Massachusetts at or near the bottom of a list of states in charitable giving. George McCully, who designed the index, described it as ''crude but telling" and argued that it showed that Massachusetts donors, especially wealthy ones, could afford to give more.

McCully also developed a compelling marketing campaign. He created an annual Catalogue for Philanthropy that is released in late fall, the season of shopping and donating, to give potential donors a taste of the work of small nonprofit organizations, betting that knowledge would make people more generous in their giving.

The Boston Foundation study criticizes the Generosity Index for being biased against high-income states, only considering people who itemize their gifts on tax forms, and ignoring cost-of-living differences such as taxes, mortgage payments, and medical costs. Written by John J. Havens and Paul G. Schervish of the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College, the report rejects the idea of having an index as needlessly chastising but concludes that if there were an index, one that took taxes, all giving (not just what's reported on itemized tax returns), and cost of living into account, Massachusetts would have ranked number 11 in 2002, far better than the Generosity Index rank of 49.

The Boston Foundation study paints a bigger picture of giving, and making people feel good about their generosity can be good for local self-esteem. But these findings don't change the core mission of the Generosity Index and of philanthropy: how to help people live more exciting philanthropic lives.

Step one is encouraging people to understand their personal finances: how much they have, how much they give, and whether they want to do more. The great leap is in creating a stronger culture of giving, where more people see with philanthropic eyes --so that driving by a vacant lot, hearing about a problem, or even just imagining what could be all prompt people to take philanthropic action.

The American tradition is one of bold questions and bolder actions, which springs from the Colonists asking what it would take to build a United States. Ultimately, philanthropy in Massachusetts must be judged not by generosity but by its impact and innovation.