It's been 10 years since the McCune Foundation and National City Corp. waged, then settled, a bitter conflict over control of the foundation's investments. At the time, it seemed immaterial: Following the McCune Foundation's establishment in 1979, the foundation's assets grew from $100 million to nearly $650 million last year. The relationship might have been testy, but at least it was lucrative.

That began to change in the last two years, as National City stock value dropped on the bank's exposure to the subprime mortgage crisis. McCune's assets are not only managed by National City, but are also heavily invested in National City stock, so much so that a drop in National City's stock value meant a drop in McCune's portfolio, as well. From 2006 to 2007, the value of the foundation's nearly 5 million National City shares dropped 31 percent, from $176.8 million to $121.2 million.

By this spring, the value of McCune's National City shares was $29 million. Foundation founder Charles L. McCune was a longtime president of Union National Bank, which was taken over by National City.

The performance of McCune, one of Pittsburgh's largest philanthropic groups, is an outlier in that its fortunes are so closely tied to one bank, a situation many other philanthropies avoid by diversifying their investments. But even those groups that spread their assets broadly across the stock market have been hit hard the last few weeks, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average, save for a few bright days, has tumbled down.

Is anybody safe?

"It's a tough time," said Stacy Palmer, editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy, a journal that monitors the nonprofit world.

"The needs are really quite enormous, and they're not able to keep up."

It's not just stock performance that philanthropies have to worry about -- their own roster of corporate, institutional and private donors is likely to be pulling back this year, more judicious with their money. That might not affect spending and program allocations this year, but expect rough waters in 2009, as most philanthropies set their budgets a year ahead of time. This year's stock market losses will affect next year's generosity.

"That's where we're going to see a real pulling back," Ms. Palmer said.

It's an odd entanglement -- the very economic circumstances generating the poor investment returns for some philanthropies are the same circumstances that are accelerating the need for charitable giving and social services. Many charity heads say the call for help is widespread and unprecedented in recent times.

One philanthropy tracker disagrees, though. The Foundation Center, which tracks giving trends, issued a report last week that said all the media hand-wringing is overblown, and the philanthropic community has deep reserves that are able to withstand recessions. In recent recessionary periods, "U.S. foundation giving in inflation-adjusted dollars did not decline and, in fact, increased slightly."

"Certainly in the short term, there's not going to be that dramatic a drop in giving," said Steven Lawrence, senior director of research at The Foundation Center. "Foundations are in the business of giving money."

Many philanthropies, burned when the last economic downturn exposed them to unwise multi-year giving commitments, are operating more conservatively these days. And while a prolonged stock market slump could change the game, the fact that so many foundations were able to pad their endowments between 2003 and 2007 means that many of them should be able to withstand the difficult year ahead, Mr. Lawrence said.

Pittsburgh's Roy A. Hunt Foundation, for example, saw its 2007-08 assets rise to $86 million, up from $81.2 million the previous fiscal year.

But that was then. Tracking Hunt Foundation's investment returns of late has been like watching a spare tire bouncing down a hill. Its portfolio stood at $88 million on May 31.

On Oct. 1, it was at $71.5 million.

Today, it's at $62 million.

That's a drop of $26 million in half a year, and $9.5 million in just half a month. McCune will be holding a meeting today to review the drop in asset value, said Beatrice Carter, director of the foundation.

"We have some things to talk about," she said. "We're in uncharted territory. It's really hard to predict. ... If we make our grants [as planned], we will be invading our principal."

Typically, the Hunt Foundation has been doling out between $3 million and $4 million, spun out of its portfolio interest earnings. Invading the principal essentially means the foundation is dipping into the reserves that were supposed to be throwing off interest.

"We have to make some hard decisions on which way to go, without invading the principal," said senior Trustee Richard Hunt, of Boston. "If we have to do it, we would do it."

While some philanthropies are being battered by the economy, others are doing their part to correct it. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation announced last week that it would spend $68 million in grants and loans to 10,000 households, with a goal of lifting Chicago neighborhoods out of the foreclosure crisis.

In general, the large grant-making endowments, with reserves to fall back on, are better off than small, social services outfits like food banks, which often rely on the larger groups for funding. Their need is great, which is why the Council on Foundations, a trade group for philanthropies, urged its members in a letter last week to be as generous as possible:

"Let's pay special attention to those situations where the loss of philanthropic resources could be the unintended consequence of mergers and consolidations that are the inevitable products of economic restructuring. In the D.C. area, there is considerable concern that the takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could result in an annual reduction of up to $47 million in philanthropic support for programs," said the letter, signed by council Chair Ralph Smith and CEO Steve Gunderson.

The only solace to be found amid the steady stream of bad news from Wall Street comes from turning the old what-comes-up adage on its head.

"We've been down before," said Ms. Carter. "What's gone down in the past, has come up."