Beyond the Backpack: State Bags’ Calculated Silence on Philanthropy

Navigating a Shifting Corporate Landscape, One Donation at a Time

In an era where corporate social responsibility is both celebrated and scrutinized, the journey of State Bags offers a compelling case study in how a mission-driven brand can adapt its communication strategy. Founded by Scot and Jacqueline Tatelman, State Bags has grown into a significant player in the premium backpack market, generating substantial revenue while maintaining a robust philanthropic arm. However, the company’s approach to publicizing its charitable endeavors has evolved, moving from overt advocacy to a more subdued, “stealth” model. This shift, the Tatelmans explain, is a response to market trends, consumer skepticism, and a changing political climate, all while aiming to fulfill a core commitment to providing essential resources and life-changing experiences for children in underserved communities.

---

Introduction

State Bags, a brand synonymous with both high-quality design and a “buy one, give one” model, has carved a unique niche in the competitive retail landscape. Co-founded by Scot and Jacqueline Tatelman, the company’s origins are rooted in a deeply personal desire to offer opportunities to children who might otherwise be excluded. Their mission: to ensure that every child has access to the tools and experiences that can shape their future, starting with something as fundamental as a durable backpack. Yet, as the brand has matured and the societal conversation around corporate altruism has become more complex, State Bags has consciously dialed back its public pronouncements about its philanthropic work. This article delves into the reasons behind this strategic pivot, exploring the motivations, challenges, and enduring impact of State Bags’ “stealth philanthropy.”

Context & Background

The genesis of State Bags can be traced back to the Tatelmans’ personal experiences and a shared vision. As children, both Scot and Jacqueline spent their summers attending sleep-away camps, experiences that profoundly shaped their lives. They recognized the transformative potential of such opportunities and felt a strong imperative to extend these benefits to children from less privileged backgrounds. In 2009, in their early twenties, they established a non-profit organization dedicated to bringing students from Brooklyn and the Bronx into the wilderness. This initiative was driven by a stark observation: the children they served often lacked basic necessities, including sturdy bags to carry their belongings. Scot Tatelman vividly recalls instances where children’s bags, often makeshift or flimsy plastic bags, would tear, leaving their possessions scattered. This visible need for practical, durable items, coupled with the desire to provide enriching experiences, laid the groundwork for what would become State Bags.

Recognizing the limitations of relying solely on external funding for their non-profit endeavors, and leveraging Jacqueline’s background in the fashion industry, the Tatelmans conceived of a business model that could sustainably support their philanthropic mission. In 2013, they co-founded State, a company specializing in premium backpacks. The core of their business strategy was a “buy one, give one” model, where each purchased backpack would trigger a donation of a backpack, and often other essential supplies, to a child in need. To ensure they had sufficient financial capacity to make these donations meaningful, they deliberately targeted the premium segment of the market. This strategy allowed for the higher profit margins necessary to fund their philanthropic efforts consistently.

The company’s operational structure reflects a clear division of focus. Jacqueline, with her expertise in creative direction and brand development, initially served as Chief Creative Officer. In 2020, amidst financial challenges, she transitioned to the role of CEO, a move that coincided with a period of significant revenue growth, reportedly increasing by 1,000% and propelling the company into eight-figure revenues. Scot, meanwhile, has remained deeply invested in the non-profit arm of their work, overseeing the philanthropic initiatives. Annually, Jacqueline allocates substantial funds, in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, to support these efforts, which include not only backpack donations but also the organization of summer camps and, more recently, one-on-one tutoring programs for children falling behind academically during the pandemic.

In-Depth Analysis

The decision by State Bags to adopt a less vocal approach to its philanthropy is multifaceted, stemming from both internal philosophy and external market pressures. Scot Tatelman has articulated a deliberate strategy of “under-communicating, but over-delivering.” This approach is informed by several key observations about the evolving landscape of corporate social responsibility and consumer behavior.

One significant factor influencing this shift is the rise and fall of overt “mission-driven” branding. In the mid-2010s, a prevailing trend saw numerous direct-to-consumer startups, particularly those targeting millennials, positioning themselves as forces for good. Brands like Warby Parker and Bombas, with their product-giveaway models, and Everlane, with its commitment to supply chain transparency, became emblematic of this movement. Even established giants like Nike and Coca-Cola began aligning themselves with social causes. The heightened focus on ethical consumption was seen as a positive development, validating the Tatelmans’ belief in the viability of “business for good.”

However, this widespread adoption of mission-driven branding eventually led to consumer skepticism. As more companies embraced social and environmental causes, the line between genuine commitment and marketing ploy began to blur. Scot Tatelman noted a period when “every brand said it was mission-driven,” leading consumers to perceive such claims as potentially disingenuous or a “cheap marketing ploy.” This saturation of mission-based messaging created an environment where authentic efforts could be drowned out or dismissed.

Adding another layer of complexity is the increasingly polarized political climate. The Trump administration’s stance against companies engaging in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, and broader criticisms of corporate activism, created a more hostile environment for brands openly championing social justice. Scot Tatelman expressed the difficulty of navigating this terrain, stating that “when you’re committed to social justice you have a target on your back. You just can’t win.” This sentiment was echoed by the broader trend of companies, including prominent ones like Target and Google, scaling back or retracting their DEI programs and philanthropic commitments in response to political pressure and shareholder demands, as noted in discussions by thinkers like James Surowiecki in Fast Company.

Furthermore, research into consumer purchasing behavior has cast doubt on the extent to which ethical considerations directly drive sales. A study by scholars from the University of Chicago and New York University, tracking the spending habits of thousands of consumers in 2024, indicated that while most consumers expressed a preference for ethical companies, this preference did not ultimately translate into purchasing decisions. This finding suggests that for a significant portion of the market, the primary drivers of purchase remain factors like price, quality, and brand appeal. Consequently, State Bags’ decision to under-communicate its mission can be seen as a pragmatic response to the reality that overt displays of social responsibility may not always yield tangible commercial benefits, and could even invite unwanted scrutiny.

State Bags’ current communication strategy reflects this nuanced understanding. While the company’s philanthropic efforts remain substantial, they are now communicated through subtler channels. The “about” page on their website and occasional Instagram posts serve as touchpoints for consumers seeking to learn more. Scot Tatelman emphasizes that the goal is to allow people to discover the mission “organically, as opposed to shoving it down their throat.” He acknowledges that many consumers may not delve deeper, and the company is comfortable with that, prioritizing authentic connection over mass pronouncements. This approach aims to foster a more engaged and informed customer base, rather than relying on broad-stroke marketing.

Pros and Cons

State Bags’ strategy of “stealth philanthropy” presents a distinct set of advantages and disadvantages:

Pros:

• Authenticity and Credibility: By focusing on delivery over public declaration, the brand can cultivate a perception of genuine commitment rather than opportunistic marketing. This can build deeper trust with those who do discover and appreciate their mission.
• Reduced Vulnerability to Political Backlash: A less visible philanthropic profile can shield the company from the political scrutiny and criticism that mission-driven brands have faced, particularly in recent years.
• Focus on Core Mission: By deemphasizing public relations around their giving, the Tatelmans and their team can concentrate their energy and resources on the actual impact of their philanthropic work, ensuring quality and effectiveness in their programs.
• Employee Engagement: Scot Tatelman points out that a clear social mission can be a powerful tool for keeping employees engaged. By allowing staff to participate in philanthropic projects, the company fosters a sense of purpose beyond profit, which can boost morale and retention.
• Customer Loyalty: While not the primary driver for all purchases, some consumers may develop stronger loyalty to brands whose values align with their own, especially if they discover these values organically and feel good about their contribution.
• Sustainable Business Practices: The deliberate choice to focus on the premium market ensures sufficient profit margins, which is crucial for the long-term sustainability of their philanthropic efforts. This financial strategy underpins their ability to consistently deliver on their promises.

Cons:

• Limited Reach and Awareness: A less vocal approach means that fewer people may be aware of State Bags’ significant charitable contributions, potentially limiting the broader positive impact of their story and inspiring others.
• Missed Marketing Opportunity: For a segment of consumers who are motivated by social impact, the lack of overt messaging might mean missing out on a key differentiator that could attract new customers.
• Potential for Misinterpretation: Without clear communication, some consumers might default to viewing State Bags solely as a retail brand, missing the core ethos that drives the company.
• Dependency on Consumer Digging: The strategy relies on customers actively seeking out information about the brand’s mission, which may not be the behavior of the majority of consumers.
• Risk of Being Perceived as Complacent: In a world where many nonprofits face funding cuts, a company that “goes stealth” might be misinterpreted as less committed, especially compared to brands that actively promote their giving.

Key Takeaways

• State Bags, founded by Scot and Jacqueline Tatelman, uses a “buy one, give one” model for premium backpacks to fund its philanthropic initiatives.
• The company’s origins lie in a desire to provide children from underserved communities with essential resources and life-changing experiences like summer camp.
• State Bags has adopted a “stealth philanthropy” approach, intentionally under-communicating its charitable work to mitigate consumer skepticism and navigate a polarized political climate.
• The brand’s shift in communication strategy is a response to the commodification of “mission-driven” marketing and the political backlash against corporate social activism.
• Research suggests that while consumers may express a preference for ethical brands, this sentiment does not always translate into purchasing behavior.
• State Bags believes that focusing on impactful delivery over public pronouncements builds a more authentic connection with consumers who seek out their mission.
• The company’s mission contributes to employee engagement and potentially fosters long-term customer loyalty among a segment of its audience.
• Despite the less vocal approach, State Bags continues to support significant philanthropic efforts, including donations and programs like tutoring and summer camps.
• The Tatelmans see value in business as a force for good, particularly in filling gaps left by reduced funding for traditional non-profits.

Future Outlook

The future of corporate philanthropy is likely to remain a dynamic and often debated topic. State Bags’ strategy of understated impact reflects a pragmatic adaptation to a landscape that has grown increasingly complex and sensitive. As the pendulum of corporate social responsibility continues to swing, brands that can demonstrate tangible positive impact, regardless of how they communicate it, may find a more resilient footing.

The Tatelmans’ commitment to providing resources and experiences for children in need remains at the core of State Bags’ identity. Their focus on financial sustainability through premium product offerings ensures that their philanthropic endeavors can continue even during times of economic uncertainty or shifts in public sentiment. While the current communication strategy prioritizes authenticity and impact over broad awareness, it’s possible that as the brand continues to grow and establish deeper roots, they may find new, nuanced ways to share their story and inspire further support for their cause.

Moreover, the broader trend of companies re-evaluating their social commitments in light of political pressures highlights the ongoing tension between profit, purpose, and public perception. Companies like Patagonia, Levi’s, Ben & Jerry’s, and Costco, which have maintained their commitment to social and environmental causes despite external pressures, serve as benchmarks for enduring mission-driven business practices. State Bags, by navigating this environment with a deliberate, albeit quieter, approach, is contributing to the ongoing conversation about how businesses can responsibly and effectively contribute to societal well-being.

Ultimately, the success of State Bags’ model will likely hinge on its ability to maintain both product quality and genuine philanthropic impact. As Scot Tatelman suggests, the need for companies to “step up and fill in the gaps” remains critical, especially for communities facing the withdrawal of support from other sources. State Bags, through its consistent if less visible efforts, appears poised to continue playing a vital role in this regard.

Call to Action

For consumers interested in supporting brands that integrate social good with their commercial operations, exploring State Bags offers an opportunity to engage with a company that prioritizes impactful giving. While their approach to communication is understated, their dedication to providing essential resources and life-changing experiences for children is evident in their sustained philanthropic efforts.

Those seeking to learn more about State Bags’ specific initiatives, including their backpack donations, summer camps, and educational support programs, are encouraged to visit the “About” section of their official website. Observing their occasional posts on platforms like Instagram can also offer glimpses into their ongoing work. By choosing to support brands like State Bags, consumers can contribute to a business model that demonstrates the potential for commerce to be a force for positive change in the world, even when that change is pursued with deliberate quietude.

For individuals and organizations looking to understand the intricacies of mission-driven business models and the challenges of corporate philanthropy in the current climate, the story of State Bags provides valuable insights into strategic adaptation and the enduring power of purpose-driven enterprise.