It is one of the most sustaining strategies that a nonprofit can take—a good article about endowments here—and different from fundraising, the subject of this article from Contributions Magazine.
An excerpt.
“When it comes to fundraising, many charitable, academic, and religious organizations are incredibly skilled. Some of these organizations have instant name recognition. They regularly receive media coverage. And they pull in hundreds of thousands of dollars from supporters in annual fundraising efforts.
“There’s no doubt that successful fundraising is an acquired skill. It does not happen by chance. It’s the reason why organizations compete so intensely to hire persons with outstanding fundraising skills and a successful track record.
“Given that, it is somewhat baffling why so many of the organizations that are most successful in fundraising struggle when it comes to building an endowment. Other non-profits, meanwhile, seem to have struck a balance, building both highly effective fundraising efforts and endowments that rival the budgets of emerging nations. Why is that?
“It is important to recognize that there is an inherent conflict between annual fundraising objectives and building an endowment. On the fundraising side, all organizations have to balance their budgets. Virtually all strive to grow the services they offer and the number of people they serve. Senior executives of these organizations often have bonuses tied to annual fundraising objectives. Boards of directors and trustees want to accomplish certain goals and have an obligation to their donors and constituents to do so.
“Now add to this the fact that there are various non-profit certifications and standards, all of which tend to focus on annual fundraising, capital campaigns, board participation, and donor designations. An organization’s by-laws may even establish funding expectations.
“All of these annual organizational goals conflict with building endowments. Endowments represent a long-term commitment for an organization. Endowments take time to build with donations and earnings. And bottom line, executives, board members, supporters, donors, and other constituents tend to be impatient. They want to see tangible results NOW.
“Even in cases in which a non-profit has managed to build a substantial endowment, it’s often tempting to use endowment income or principal to meet current operating needs. Doing so, however, clearly inhibits growth and delays the endowment from providing its ultimate goals.”
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
The B Corporation
The B Corporation is an innovative way to do some good for the community and make money, as reported by the Stanford Social Innovation Review.
An excerpt.
“Being the only one of something—whatever that something is—generally has one of two results. Either it makes you hot stuff or it backfires. In business, you hope for the first. It’s supply and demand at its finest: Less of you increases the desire for you. But move away from theory and into practice, and real life may not always work that way. Sometimes being the only one of something means that fewer people understand you or realize what you truly have to offer. Instead of becoming rare, you become an anomaly—the product people aren’t quite sure what to do with, an outcast.
“I am the owner of In Every Language, Kentucky’s only certified B Corporation. Not only are we the only B in Kentucky, which means we’ve been certified as a socially responsible business, we’re the only B in our industry. So if anybody understands what it’s like to be the only one of something in business, it’s me.
“Even before certification, In Every Language was a social enterprise. Based in Louisville, Ky., In Every Language provides translating, interpreting, and other language services to clients around the world. That’s the business part of what we do. When it comes to the social part, we do two different things.
“First, the community nature of translation is inherent. Translators take what one person says and translate it into another language, so another person can understand. Without translators, information wouldn’t pass correctly between cultures and countries, international misunderstandings would develop, and wars could start. The American Translators Association claims that it takes less time to train a fighter pilot than it takes to train an Arabic interpreter, and the interpreter is more important to national security.
“Less frighteningly, community interpreters help patients better understand their course of care and help immigrants obtain access to community services. Both translators and interpreters provide access to information and knowledge that the language barrier blocked before. Being a translator automatically means being a helper. The sheer fact that In Every Language is a translation provider automatically integrates social cause into our business because, regardless of the message translated, social benefit lies in the act of translating itself.
“For me, though, this wasn’t enough. Although the translation industry is replete with social benefit, not every translation company is a social enterprise. In Every Language is the industry’s only certified B Corporation for a reason: We do translation differently.”
An excerpt.
“Being the only one of something—whatever that something is—generally has one of two results. Either it makes you hot stuff or it backfires. In business, you hope for the first. It’s supply and demand at its finest: Less of you increases the desire for you. But move away from theory and into practice, and real life may not always work that way. Sometimes being the only one of something means that fewer people understand you or realize what you truly have to offer. Instead of becoming rare, you become an anomaly—the product people aren’t quite sure what to do with, an outcast.
“I am the owner of In Every Language, Kentucky’s only certified B Corporation. Not only are we the only B in Kentucky, which means we’ve been certified as a socially responsible business, we’re the only B in our industry. So if anybody understands what it’s like to be the only one of something in business, it’s me.
“Even before certification, In Every Language was a social enterprise. Based in Louisville, Ky., In Every Language provides translating, interpreting, and other language services to clients around the world. That’s the business part of what we do. When it comes to the social part, we do two different things.
“First, the community nature of translation is inherent. Translators take what one person says and translate it into another language, so another person can understand. Without translators, information wouldn’t pass correctly between cultures and countries, international misunderstandings would develop, and wars could start. The American Translators Association claims that it takes less time to train a fighter pilot than it takes to train an Arabic interpreter, and the interpreter is more important to national security.
“Less frighteningly, community interpreters help patients better understand their course of care and help immigrants obtain access to community services. Both translators and interpreters provide access to information and knowledge that the language barrier blocked before. Being a translator automatically means being a helper. The sheer fact that In Every Language is a translation provider automatically integrates social cause into our business because, regardless of the message translated, social benefit lies in the act of translating itself.
“For me, though, this wasn’t enough. Although the translation industry is replete with social benefit, not every translation company is a social enterprise. In Every Language is the industry’s only certified B Corporation for a reason: We do translation differently.”
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Sacramento’s Philanthropy
As this story in the Sacramento Bee notes, the philanthropic picture is Sacramento is pretty good, but—as with many things—can certainly improve.
An excerpt.
“Residents of the Sacramento region are less likely to give to charity than their counterparts nationwide – and the average amount given per household lags behind the national average.
“These are among the findings of the Greater Sacramento Generosity Project scheduled for release today, and the impetus for a campaign this fall to boost charitable giving.
“The project, commissioned by the Sacramento Region Community Foundation and the Nonprofit Resource Center, found that 62 percent of households in the four-county region — El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento and Yolo – give to charities, compared with 66 percent of households nationwide. The average annual contribution per donor household in the Sacramento region is $1,990, trailing the national average of $2,355.
“Representatives of philanthropic organizations say individual giving is essential to filling the gaps left by cuts in government services.
"For a lot of nonprofits, the downturn in the economy has created a greater demand for their services," said Ruth Blank, chief executive officer of the Sacramento Region Community Foundation.
"This is about individual giving," said Ann Lucas, a consultant and former executive director of the Nonprofit Resource Center in Sacramento. "A lot of the time we look to the corporate sector to give."
“But nationally, she said, only about 5 percent of charitable giving comes from corporate donors, and an additional 12 percent from foundations. Individual donations account for 83 percent.”
An excerpt.
“Residents of the Sacramento region are less likely to give to charity than their counterparts nationwide – and the average amount given per household lags behind the national average.
“These are among the findings of the Greater Sacramento Generosity Project scheduled for release today, and the impetus for a campaign this fall to boost charitable giving.
“The project, commissioned by the Sacramento Region Community Foundation and the Nonprofit Resource Center, found that 62 percent of households in the four-county region — El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento and Yolo – give to charities, compared with 66 percent of households nationwide. The average annual contribution per donor household in the Sacramento region is $1,990, trailing the national average of $2,355.
“Representatives of philanthropic organizations say individual giving is essential to filling the gaps left by cuts in government services.
"For a lot of nonprofits, the downturn in the economy has created a greater demand for their services," said Ruth Blank, chief executive officer of the Sacramento Region Community Foundation.
"This is about individual giving," said Ann Lucas, a consultant and former executive director of the Nonprofit Resource Center in Sacramento. "A lot of the time we look to the corporate sector to give."
“But nationally, she said, only about 5 percent of charitable giving comes from corporate donors, and an additional 12 percent from foundations. Individual donations account for 83 percent.”
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Catholic Charitable Works
Catholic Charities is the largest private nonprofit provider of charitable work in the United States only surpassed by the federal government, and the overall charitable work of the Roman Catholic Church is thought by many to be the largest source of charitable help in the world.
For many years, committed Catholics have struggled with the wandering missions of many of its most historical charitable efforts, but lately, that has begun to change, as this story from the Catholic News Agency reports on the changes in one of the largest of them, Caritas.
An excerpt.
“Rome, Italy, May 24, 2011 / 11:35 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The goal of a new slogan adopted by the Vatican’s official charity is being called “unrealistic” by the Church official charged with overseeing the organization.
“Cardinal Robert Sarah said he doesn’t understand Caritas International’s new theme –
“One Human Family – Zero Poverty,” which was unveiled at the charity’s annual meeting this week in Rome.
“I think it would be wise not to follow some unrealistic slogans. But, I'm very hesitant to understand what zero poverty means, because Christ said we will always have the poor. So, what is a realistic way we can fight the poverty? But, it's difficult to absolutely cancel out poverty,” he told CNA May 22.
“The slogan is both the theme for this week’s conference and for the organization’s strategic document for the next four years.
“The cardinal’s comments come at a difficult time for Caritas. The organization faces criticism from Cardinal Sarah, president of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, and others for a perceived lack of Catholic identity.
“Earlier this year, the Vatican blocked Caritas’ current general secretary, Lesley-Anne Knight, from running for re-appointment to her post. The charity’s governance is also being revamped to give Vatican officials more control over its work.
“Cardinal Sarah alluded to these concerns in his opening remarks at the Caritas meeting on Sunday, which was attended by roughly 300 delegates.
“I believe it is important to understand that our charitable organizations are located within the Church and not alongside her,” he said.
“A Caritas that wasn’t an ecclesial expression would have no meaning or existence. The Church cannot be considered as a partner of Catholic organizations. They are the organizations that take part in her mission.”
“He also stressed that the agency’s work is “not merely philanthropic” but above all “entails giving back to human persons all their dignity as children of God.”
For many years, committed Catholics have struggled with the wandering missions of many of its most historical charitable efforts, but lately, that has begun to change, as this story from the Catholic News Agency reports on the changes in one of the largest of them, Caritas.
An excerpt.
“Rome, Italy, May 24, 2011 / 11:35 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The goal of a new slogan adopted by the Vatican’s official charity is being called “unrealistic” by the Church official charged with overseeing the organization.
“Cardinal Robert Sarah said he doesn’t understand Caritas International’s new theme –
“One Human Family – Zero Poverty,” which was unveiled at the charity’s annual meeting this week in Rome.
“I think it would be wise not to follow some unrealistic slogans. But, I'm very hesitant to understand what zero poverty means, because Christ said we will always have the poor. So, what is a realistic way we can fight the poverty? But, it's difficult to absolutely cancel out poverty,” he told CNA May 22.
“The slogan is both the theme for this week’s conference and for the organization’s strategic document for the next four years.
“The cardinal’s comments come at a difficult time for Caritas. The organization faces criticism from Cardinal Sarah, president of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, and others for a perceived lack of Catholic identity.
“Earlier this year, the Vatican blocked Caritas’ current general secretary, Lesley-Anne Knight, from running for re-appointment to her post. The charity’s governance is also being revamped to give Vatican officials more control over its work.
“Cardinal Sarah alluded to these concerns in his opening remarks at the Caritas meeting on Sunday, which was attended by roughly 300 delegates.
“I believe it is important to understand that our charitable organizations are located within the Church and not alongside her,” he said.
“A Caritas that wasn’t an ecclesial expression would have no meaning or existence. The Church cannot be considered as a partner of Catholic organizations. They are the organizations that take part in her mission.”
“He also stressed that the agency’s work is “not merely philanthropic” but above all “entails giving back to human persons all their dignity as children of God.”
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Social Enterprise
A successful effort once again demonstrating how social enterprise can work when done right, and how intrinsically generous the American people are, as this story from the St Louis Post-Dispatch reveals.
An excerpt.
“In case you missed the recent media blitz, this week marked the one-year anniversary of Panera Bread Co.'s experimental pay-what-you-want nonprofit cafe in Clayton.
“Yes, one year later, the cafe is still kicking.
“Based on its success, Panera's foundation has transferred two more cafes to the nonprofit model — one in Dearborn, Mich., and one in Portland, Ore. — under the name Panera Cares.
"Amazing," said Ron Shaich, executive chairman of the Sunset Hills-based company that operates locally as St. Louis Bread Co. "The cynics said we'd never make it."
“But others wondered whether Panera picked somewhat of a sure thing by putting this concept in Clayton, where there are plenty of well-heeled customers who can afford to pay their fair share. (The cafe gives patrons a 'suggested funding level" instead of a set price and leaves it up to the customer to decide how much they want to or can pay.)
“These folks said it would have been a far bolder statement to put the cafe in a low-income neighborhood. That's what a group of activists did a couple of years ago when they opened the Urban Studio Cafe in old north St. Louis, just down the street from Crown Candy. That cafe had set prices, but the proceeds were used to provide jobs in the cafe to local residents.
“But it never turned a profit and was forced to close earlier this year. A couple have opened a for-profit business in that space called La Mancha Coffeehouse.
“Urban Studio Cafe's demise does not necessarily mean that such a model can't work in poorer neighborhoods.
“But Shaich says those who would want him to do that perhaps misunderstand his original intention. It wasn't to cure poverty — but to start by helping those who are struggling to get by.
"This is about middle-class folks who are unemployed and who need a hand up," he said. "It's about us."
An excerpt.
“In case you missed the recent media blitz, this week marked the one-year anniversary of Panera Bread Co.'s experimental pay-what-you-want nonprofit cafe in Clayton.
“Yes, one year later, the cafe is still kicking.
“Based on its success, Panera's foundation has transferred two more cafes to the nonprofit model — one in Dearborn, Mich., and one in Portland, Ore. — under the name Panera Cares.
"Amazing," said Ron Shaich, executive chairman of the Sunset Hills-based company that operates locally as St. Louis Bread Co. "The cynics said we'd never make it."
“But others wondered whether Panera picked somewhat of a sure thing by putting this concept in Clayton, where there are plenty of well-heeled customers who can afford to pay their fair share. (The cafe gives patrons a 'suggested funding level" instead of a set price and leaves it up to the customer to decide how much they want to or can pay.)
“These folks said it would have been a far bolder statement to put the cafe in a low-income neighborhood. That's what a group of activists did a couple of years ago when they opened the Urban Studio Cafe in old north St. Louis, just down the street from Crown Candy. That cafe had set prices, but the proceeds were used to provide jobs in the cafe to local residents.
“But it never turned a profit and was forced to close earlier this year. A couple have opened a for-profit business in that space called La Mancha Coffeehouse.
“Urban Studio Cafe's demise does not necessarily mean that such a model can't work in poorer neighborhoods.
“But Shaich says those who would want him to do that perhaps misunderstand his original intention. It wasn't to cure poverty — but to start by helping those who are struggling to get by.
"This is about middle-class folks who are unemployed and who need a hand up," he said. "It's about us."
Monday, May 23, 2011
Nonprofit Mission
Mission is—as we write on our website—the central aspect of leadership and organizational strategy too often overlooked and underutilized, as this article from Harvard Business Review notes.
An excerpt.
“Mission" for nonprofits is the same as "profits" for private sector companies. In the private sector, corporations achieve their goals by carefully designing business operations that are reflected in a budget and then regularly reporting on how actual profits compare to that budget. If mission accomplishment is as important as profit attainment, why do most nonprofits not spend equivalent time in mission creation and monitoring?
“In reality, nonprofits often completely mess this up. As important as missions are, nonprofits frequently go off in ineffective directions by relying on mission statements that can be little more than slogans. At a time when nonprofits around the world are struggling both to stay afloat and to achieve their missions, they are missing out on one of the most valuable tools available to them.
“As important as they are, mission statements are frequently little more than slogans. Many are lengthy and ambiguous or, to be useful, they must be accompanied by vision statements and lists of values, goals, principles and objectives. Because they are not carefully constructed, most mission statements cannot be used for regular and rigorous analysis, as is the case with corporate sales and profits. Furthermore, many nonprofit managers do not instill the discipline in their organizations to use the mission on a regular basis as a tool to make decisions and achieve goals. Quite the opposite is true with the sales and profit budgets of successful corporations.
“An effective mission statement must be a clear description of where an organization is headed in the future that distinctly sets it apart from other entities and makes a compelling case for the need it fills. Furthermore, this mission must be short, memorable and appropriate for a variety of organizational stakeholders including, for example, employees, funding sources, served constituencies and the Board of Trustees.”
An excerpt.
“Mission" for nonprofits is the same as "profits" for private sector companies. In the private sector, corporations achieve their goals by carefully designing business operations that are reflected in a budget and then regularly reporting on how actual profits compare to that budget. If mission accomplishment is as important as profit attainment, why do most nonprofits not spend equivalent time in mission creation and monitoring?
“In reality, nonprofits often completely mess this up. As important as missions are, nonprofits frequently go off in ineffective directions by relying on mission statements that can be little more than slogans. At a time when nonprofits around the world are struggling both to stay afloat and to achieve their missions, they are missing out on one of the most valuable tools available to them.
“As important as they are, mission statements are frequently little more than slogans. Many are lengthy and ambiguous or, to be useful, they must be accompanied by vision statements and lists of values, goals, principles and objectives. Because they are not carefully constructed, most mission statements cannot be used for regular and rigorous analysis, as is the case with corporate sales and profits. Furthermore, many nonprofit managers do not instill the discipline in their organizations to use the mission on a regular basis as a tool to make decisions and achieve goals. Quite the opposite is true with the sales and profit budgets of successful corporations.
“An effective mission statement must be a clear description of where an organization is headed in the future that distinctly sets it apart from other entities and makes a compelling case for the need it fills. Furthermore, this mission must be short, memorable and appropriate for a variety of organizational stakeholders including, for example, employees, funding sources, served constituencies and the Board of Trustees.”
Friday, May 20, 2011
Nonprofit Marketing
It has always been one of the most important aspects of successful nonprofit management and one of the least understood, as this article from Joanne Fritz notes.
An excerpt.
“When I started working in the nonprofit world, marketing was a dirty word. No, really!
“The one person who changed that perception was Philip Kotler. His book, Strategic Marketing for NonProfit Organizations, was an eye opener for those of us who were struggling to find ways of making our nonprofits relevant to a world gone mad with its love of things.
“I don't remember exactly how I stumbled upon Kotler's book, but it opened a new world. I learned that marketing did not equal "selling" but, as Kotler explains, "Marketing and selling are almost opposites. Hard sell marketing is a contradiction...Marketing is not the art of finding clever ways to dispose of what you make. Marketing is the art of creating genuine customer value. It is the art of helping your customers become better off. The marketer's watchwords are quality, service, and value." Q&A by Kotler.
“Kotler understood the "third sector." In an early article, he said:
"In most societies of the world, economic activity is a function of the actions and interactions of a profit sector and a governmental sector. The American economy, however, contains an important third sector made up of tens of thousands of private, non-for-profit organizations....
"This strong third sector constitutes a middle way for meeting social needs, without resorting to the profit motive on the one hand or government bureaucracy on the other. Third sector organizations tend to be socially responsive and service-oriented. They specialize in the delivery of social services that are not adequately provided by either business or government....While Big Business is healthy and Big Government continues to grow, the third sector...is in trouble."
“Kotler thought marketing was the answer. He pointed out that we were all doing marketing without realizing or acknowledging it, saying, "...all organizations do it whether they know it or not When this dawns on a nonprofit organization, the response is much like Moliere's character in Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme who utters: 'Good Heaven! For more than forty years I have been speaking prose without knowing it.'"
An excerpt.
“When I started working in the nonprofit world, marketing was a dirty word. No, really!
“The one person who changed that perception was Philip Kotler. His book, Strategic Marketing for NonProfit Organizations, was an eye opener for those of us who were struggling to find ways of making our nonprofits relevant to a world gone mad with its love of things.
“I don't remember exactly how I stumbled upon Kotler's book, but it opened a new world. I learned that marketing did not equal "selling" but, as Kotler explains, "Marketing and selling are almost opposites. Hard sell marketing is a contradiction...Marketing is not the art of finding clever ways to dispose of what you make. Marketing is the art of creating genuine customer value. It is the art of helping your customers become better off. The marketer's watchwords are quality, service, and value." Q&A by Kotler.
“Kotler understood the "third sector." In an early article, he said:
"In most societies of the world, economic activity is a function of the actions and interactions of a profit sector and a governmental sector. The American economy, however, contains an important third sector made up of tens of thousands of private, non-for-profit organizations....
"This strong third sector constitutes a middle way for meeting social needs, without resorting to the profit motive on the one hand or government bureaucracy on the other. Third sector organizations tend to be socially responsive and service-oriented. They specialize in the delivery of social services that are not adequately provided by either business or government....While Big Business is healthy and Big Government continues to grow, the third sector...is in trouble."
“Kotler thought marketing was the answer. He pointed out that we were all doing marketing without realizing or acknowledging it, saying, "...all organizations do it whether they know it or not When this dawns on a nonprofit organization, the response is much like Moliere's character in Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme who utters: 'Good Heaven! For more than forty years I have been speaking prose without knowing it.'"
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Nonprofits/Forprofits
Here is a list of ten nonprofits that act like forprofits, from The Street.
An excerpt.
“BOSTON (TheStreet) -- The line between for-profit companies and nonprofit charities continues to blur.
“The organizational creep of nonprofits into areas that seem more in keeping with the for-profit world is nothing new. In an effort to boost their bottom line, many charities have branched out into other investments -- real estate holdings, property management, paid endorsements and retail sales among them.
“Drawing executive expertise has meant having to offer private-sector-sized salaries. Money donors ponied up for a given cause is often diverted to legal fees and political lobbying.
“And the organizational structure of some nonprofits has evolved in new directions.
“In 2007, Google(GOOG_) launched Google.org, an effort defined as a for-profit charity. Seeded with 3 million shares of company stock, it has primarily funded alternative-energy projects. Other nonprofits are looking closer at "hybrid" models to combine profit-driven strategies with charity-minded outcomes.
"For many years nonprofits have often used for-profit subsidiaries or a fee-for-service approach," says Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, a service that evaluates the financial health of more than 5,500 American charities. "In fact, the biggest piece of income for nonprofits is not individual contributions or government money -- it comes from fee-for-service income. This notion of hybrid, or the 'for-profit nonprofit,' is nothing new at all."
An excerpt.
“BOSTON (TheStreet) -- The line between for-profit companies and nonprofit charities continues to blur.
“The organizational creep of nonprofits into areas that seem more in keeping with the for-profit world is nothing new. In an effort to boost their bottom line, many charities have branched out into other investments -- real estate holdings, property management, paid endorsements and retail sales among them.
“Drawing executive expertise has meant having to offer private-sector-sized salaries. Money donors ponied up for a given cause is often diverted to legal fees and political lobbying.
“And the organizational structure of some nonprofits has evolved in new directions.
“In 2007, Google(GOOG_) launched Google.org, an effort defined as a for-profit charity. Seeded with 3 million shares of company stock, it has primarily funded alternative-energy projects. Other nonprofits are looking closer at "hybrid" models to combine profit-driven strategies with charity-minded outcomes.
"For many years nonprofits have often used for-profit subsidiaries or a fee-for-service approach," says Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, a service that evaluates the financial health of more than 5,500 American charities. "In fact, the biggest piece of income for nonprofits is not individual contributions or government money -- it comes from fee-for-service income. This notion of hybrid, or the 'for-profit nonprofit,' is nothing new at all."
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Nonprofit/Forprofit Boards
This is a book review of a new book (having greater value than a book soley about nonprofit boards in the congruence between the two) about boards and transitioning from one to the other, from Harvard Business Weekly.
An excerpt.
“Editor's note: For those of who have attended meetings of both nonprofit and for-profit boards, the differences between the two organizations couldn't be clearer. Nonprofit boards meetings tend to be longer, less tightly organized, and more sporadically attended by the board members themselves. Why this happens is one of the many subjects discussed in the new book Joining a Nonprofit Board: What You Need to Know, by authors Marc J. Epstein of Rice University and F. Warren McFarlan of Harvard Business School. In this excerpt from the introduction, Rice and McFarland highlight the major similarities and differences between the different types of boards and what newcomers to nonprofit governance can expect.
“Comparing Nonprofits and For-Profits
"There are a number of important similarities and differences between the operations and challenges of nonprofits and for-profits of which a new nonprofit board member must be cognizant. Some of the more important items are discussed in this section.
“Similarities
"There are a number of similarities between for-profits and non-profits which make people with for-profit experience particularly helpful as board members. The key similarities include:
1. Both organizations can grow, transform, merge, or die. Success is not guaranteed for either type of organization, but requires sustained work.
2. In both cases, cash is king. This for-profit focus is critical for a nonprofit board.
3. In both settings, good management and leadership really matter. Delivery of service, motivating and inspiring staff, and conceiving of new directions for growth are all vitally important.
4. Planning, budgeting, and measurement systems in are vital in both settings.
5. Both types of organizations face the challenges of integrating subject matter specialists into a generalist framework.
6. Both organizations add value to society. They just do it in different ways.
"In short, there is much overlap between the skills needed and perspectives provided by leaders in the two types of organizations. This is a key reason why social enterprise courses have taken root in business schools and why, appropriately socialized, those with for-profit backgrounds can contribute so much to the nonprofit world.”
An excerpt.
“Editor's note: For those of who have attended meetings of both nonprofit and for-profit boards, the differences between the two organizations couldn't be clearer. Nonprofit boards meetings tend to be longer, less tightly organized, and more sporadically attended by the board members themselves. Why this happens is one of the many subjects discussed in the new book Joining a Nonprofit Board: What You Need to Know, by authors Marc J. Epstein of Rice University and F. Warren McFarlan of Harvard Business School. In this excerpt from the introduction, Rice and McFarland highlight the major similarities and differences between the different types of boards and what newcomers to nonprofit governance can expect.
“Comparing Nonprofits and For-Profits
"There are a number of important similarities and differences between the operations and challenges of nonprofits and for-profits of which a new nonprofit board member must be cognizant. Some of the more important items are discussed in this section.
“Similarities
"There are a number of similarities between for-profits and non-profits which make people with for-profit experience particularly helpful as board members. The key similarities include:
1. Both organizations can grow, transform, merge, or die. Success is not guaranteed for either type of organization, but requires sustained work.
2. In both cases, cash is king. This for-profit focus is critical for a nonprofit board.
3. In both settings, good management and leadership really matter. Delivery of service, motivating and inspiring staff, and conceiving of new directions for growth are all vitally important.
4. Planning, budgeting, and measurement systems in are vital in both settings.
5. Both types of organizations face the challenges of integrating subject matter specialists into a generalist framework.
6. Both organizations add value to society. They just do it in different ways.
"In short, there is much overlap between the skills needed and perspectives provided by leaders in the two types of organizations. This is a key reason why social enterprise courses have taken root in business schools and why, appropriately socialized, those with for-profit backgrounds can contribute so much to the nonprofit world.”
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Morality of Outcome
I’m reading a great book, Uncharitable: How Restraints on Nonprofits Undermine Their Potential, whose theme can be determined by this excerpt:
“Ironically, by denying charity the tools of capitalism while allowing the for-profit sector to feast on them, we place charity at a severe disadvantage to the for-profit sector, on every front and at every level. The hands of charity are tied, while the for-profit sector scoops every penny off the economic table. Charity is segregated from the rest of the economic world. And this apartheid is the result of its own ideology. It is in the name of charity that capitalism is banished. Indeed, charity could not be undermined with more homage paid to charity. But the principal beneficiary of this charity is the for-profit sector. The poor are left to take some solace in the fact that charity observed all the discrimination with great frugality.
“It is a further irony that we prohibit charity from using the tools of capitalism to rectify the very disparities some would claim capitalism creates. We allow people to make huge profits doing any number of things that harm the poor, but prohibit anyone from making a profit doing anything that will help them. Want to make a million selling violent video games to kids? Go for it. Want to make a million funding the cure for childhood leukemia? You are a parasite. The illogic is breathtaking. The ramification is even more so: if free-market ideology could rectify the disparities some claim are created by free-market practices, isn’t the nonprofit ideology that obstructs it the problem in the first place? (p. 9, italics in original)
“Ironically, by denying charity the tools of capitalism while allowing the for-profit sector to feast on them, we place charity at a severe disadvantage to the for-profit sector, on every front and at every level. The hands of charity are tied, while the for-profit sector scoops every penny off the economic table. Charity is segregated from the rest of the economic world. And this apartheid is the result of its own ideology. It is in the name of charity that capitalism is banished. Indeed, charity could not be undermined with more homage paid to charity. But the principal beneficiary of this charity is the for-profit sector. The poor are left to take some solace in the fact that charity observed all the discrimination with great frugality.
“It is a further irony that we prohibit charity from using the tools of capitalism to rectify the very disparities some would claim capitalism creates. We allow people to make huge profits doing any number of things that harm the poor, but prohibit anyone from making a profit doing anything that will help them. Want to make a million selling violent video games to kids? Go for it. Want to make a million funding the cure for childhood leukemia? You are a parasite. The illogic is breathtaking. The ramification is even more so: if free-market ideology could rectify the disparities some claim are created by free-market practices, isn’t the nonprofit ideology that obstructs it the problem in the first place? (p. 9, italics in original)
Monday, May 16, 2011
Social Innovation, Within the States
America is surely the most innovative country on the planet, still the magnet for the world’s budding entrepreneurs, and this survey from Fast Company reveals the depth of that innovation among the states, with many nonprofits among the best and brightest.
The gateway to the states links.
The gateway to the states links.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Nonprofit Works to Merge Towns
A great reminder of how an innovative nonprofit organization can impact public policy comes to us from New Jersey, as reported by the Daily Record.
An excerpt.
“MENDHAM — Forces are converging to unite both Mendhams, both Chesters and Washington Township under one municipal government and one school system.
“It is a plan Gina Genovese, co-founder of Courage to Connect NJ, encouraged Wednesday at a Mendham Borough Library forum that drew two dozen homeowners.
“The nonprofit, which has given some 30 presentations statewide since it formed last year, is pushing the idea that true savings occur when five to 10 municipalities connect by sharing a government and keeping their individual identities as neighborhoods.
“A band of 15 residents from the Chesters and Mendhams, now emerging publicly as the Mendham Chester Alliance, said at the forum that they have calculated that uniting their four municipalities under one government and one school system would save $32 million a year.
“If you adjust the tax formula and make it the same for each town, that’s about a 30 percent savings on everybody’s taxes,” said Bruce Flitcroft of Mendham Township, the chief executive officer of Alliant Technologies and an alliance member. “That’s huge. How do you argue with it?”
An excerpt.
“MENDHAM — Forces are converging to unite both Mendhams, both Chesters and Washington Township under one municipal government and one school system.
“It is a plan Gina Genovese, co-founder of Courage to Connect NJ, encouraged Wednesday at a Mendham Borough Library forum that drew two dozen homeowners.
“The nonprofit, which has given some 30 presentations statewide since it formed last year, is pushing the idea that true savings occur when five to 10 municipalities connect by sharing a government and keeping their individual identities as neighborhoods.
“A band of 15 residents from the Chesters and Mendhams, now emerging publicly as the Mendham Chester Alliance, said at the forum that they have calculated that uniting their four municipalities under one government and one school system would save $32 million a year.
“If you adjust the tax formula and make it the same for each town, that’s about a 30 percent savings on everybody’s taxes,” said Bruce Flitcroft of Mendham Township, the chief executive officer of Alliant Technologies and an alliance member. “That’s huge. How do you argue with it?”
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Nonprofit Innovation
This nonprofit project in Richmond, Virginia, reported by the Richmond Times Dispatch, is founded on a very creative idea, exactly the kind of help a certain downtown street in Sacramento needs.
An excerpt.
“Adam Lovelady found a place to get help with a modest overhaul of his front yard on Richmond's North Side.
“With little money to spend, he became the first client of the nonprofit Storefront for Community Design, which opened in February as an affordable resource for design and building projects throughout the city.
“Lovelady was paired with a volunteer trained in landscape architecture and ended up with a sketched plan for his yard. Following the suggestions of Juliellen Sarver, Lovelady got to work, digging up and replanting about 15 shrubs, spreading mulch and clearing a path to recognize his 2½-year-old son Carter's route to the side yard.
"The sod will have to wait for another year and another budget," Lovelady said.
“The Storefront, which is being funded by the city along with individuals, companies and organizations, operates on the notion that the quality of a neighborhood is determined in part by its design.
“The center tries to help by matching prospective projects with professionals who can help navigate the city's bureaucracy and shed light on possibilities.
"The average person is not exposed to design professionals. This provides a forum for that," said Andrew Moore, a member of the Storefront's advisory committee and a senior associate with Glavé & Holmes Architecture.
"It's about quality and inclusion," added board member Mary Harding Sadler, a historical architect with Sadler & Whitehead Architects and chairwoman of the city's Commission of Architectural Review. "It's about the whole city, raising the bar and making high-quality design possible."
“The Storefront's first hour of service is free. After that, rates are charged on a sliding schedule.”
An excerpt.
“Adam Lovelady found a place to get help with a modest overhaul of his front yard on Richmond's North Side.
“With little money to spend, he became the first client of the nonprofit Storefront for Community Design, which opened in February as an affordable resource for design and building projects throughout the city.
“Lovelady was paired with a volunteer trained in landscape architecture and ended up with a sketched plan for his yard. Following the suggestions of Juliellen Sarver, Lovelady got to work, digging up and replanting about 15 shrubs, spreading mulch and clearing a path to recognize his 2½-year-old son Carter's route to the side yard.
"The sod will have to wait for another year and another budget," Lovelady said.
“The Storefront, which is being funded by the city along with individuals, companies and organizations, operates on the notion that the quality of a neighborhood is determined in part by its design.
“The center tries to help by matching prospective projects with professionals who can help navigate the city's bureaucracy and shed light on possibilities.
"The average person is not exposed to design professionals. This provides a forum for that," said Andrew Moore, a member of the Storefront's advisory committee and a senior associate with Glavé & Holmes Architecture.
"It's about quality and inclusion," added board member Mary Harding Sadler, a historical architect with Sadler & Whitehead Architects and chairwoman of the city's Commission of Architectural Review. "It's about the whole city, raising the bar and making high-quality design possible."
“The Storefront's first hour of service is free. After that, rates are charged on a sliding schedule.”
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Pollution Destroying Buildings
Wow! That is all you can say about this example of the continued ability of technology to produce solutions to our problems, as this article from Fast Company reports.
An excerpt.
“Struggling to breathe because of the layer of smog hovering in the atmosphere above you? Alcoa has come up with a potential solution for that most unpleasant of man-made environmental issues: the smog-eating building.
“Alcoa's Reynobond with Ecoclean cleans both itself and the air around it, by decomposing smog, dirt, diesel fumes, and all the other nasty pollutants that hover around building surfaces. Alcoa claims that 10,000 square feet of the panels have the equivalent air-cleansing power of 80 trees. No need for trees when you have buildings that eat smog!
“The panel features a titanium dioxide coating (that's the EcoClean part) on top of a pre-painted aluminum surface (that's the Reynobond). Sunlight acts as a catalyst to break down the pollutants on the aluminum panel into harmless particles that can be washed away by rain. Since the Reynobond surface is super hydrophilic, water particles don't bead on top of it--they collapse and run down the side of the building. Just a small amount of rain or humidity can clean the surface.
“Alcoa explains how the technology can help smog-laden cities:
“As the primary component of smog, NOx not only makes buildings dirty, but it also threatens the quality of the air we breathe. But when NOx molecules float near the surface of Reynobond with EcoClean, they are attacked by free radicals generated from the titanium dioxide reacting with water and oxygen in the air. The free radicals oxidize the NOx molecules, converting them to a harmless nitrate. In this way, Reynobond with EcoClean constantly works to remove pollutants by using sunlight and the water vapor and oxygen in the air to clean the air itself.
“There are monetary benefits, too. The Reynobond with Ecoclean panels cost 4% to 5% more than their non-smog-eating counterparts, but they can cut a building's maintenance costs by up to half since the panels are self-cleaning.”
An excerpt.
“Struggling to breathe because of the layer of smog hovering in the atmosphere above you? Alcoa has come up with a potential solution for that most unpleasant of man-made environmental issues: the smog-eating building.
“Alcoa's Reynobond with Ecoclean cleans both itself and the air around it, by decomposing smog, dirt, diesel fumes, and all the other nasty pollutants that hover around building surfaces. Alcoa claims that 10,000 square feet of the panels have the equivalent air-cleansing power of 80 trees. No need for trees when you have buildings that eat smog!
“The panel features a titanium dioxide coating (that's the EcoClean part) on top of a pre-painted aluminum surface (that's the Reynobond). Sunlight acts as a catalyst to break down the pollutants on the aluminum panel into harmless particles that can be washed away by rain. Since the Reynobond surface is super hydrophilic, water particles don't bead on top of it--they collapse and run down the side of the building. Just a small amount of rain or humidity can clean the surface.
“Alcoa explains how the technology can help smog-laden cities:
“As the primary component of smog, NOx not only makes buildings dirty, but it also threatens the quality of the air we breathe. But when NOx molecules float near the surface of Reynobond with EcoClean, they are attacked by free radicals generated from the titanium dioxide reacting with water and oxygen in the air. The free radicals oxidize the NOx molecules, converting them to a harmless nitrate. In this way, Reynobond with EcoClean constantly works to remove pollutants by using sunlight and the water vapor and oxygen in the air to clean the air itself.
“There are monetary benefits, too. The Reynobond with Ecoclean panels cost 4% to 5% more than their non-smog-eating counterparts, but they can cut a building's maintenance costs by up to half since the panels are self-cleaning.”
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
The Ancient Exploitation
It is surely that directed towards women—and the prevalence of nonprofits working to help women, even in the advanced culture of the United States, testifies to that—and thankfully, in the regions where the exploitation of women is still pronounced, it continues to be challenged, as reported by Harvard Business Weekly.
An excerpt.
“India is a country where many women struggle for survival from the day they are born. Girls in India are less likely to be breastfed than boys, for instance, and less likely to be immunized.
“But India also has the highest number of elected female representatives in the world. A 1993 constitutional amendment meant to broaden the scope and accessibility of democracy called for the creation of directly elected local councils at the district, intermediate, and village levels, and mandated that one-third of all council seats be filled by women. The amendment is an ongoing policy experiment of sorts, on an epic scale.
“As Harvard Business School professor Lakshmi Iyer and her colleagues discovered, it's been producing encouraging results. Their research suggests that disadvantaged or minority groups in India whose members are elected to local governments have not only more of a "political voice" but also more access to and better results from the justice system.
“In the working paper The Power of Political Voice: Women's Political Representation and Crime in India, Iyer, Anandi Mani (University of Warwick), and Prachi Mishra and Petia Topalova (International Monetary Fund) examine the effect that mandated political representation for women has had on crimes against women.”
An excerpt.
“India is a country where many women struggle for survival from the day they are born. Girls in India are less likely to be breastfed than boys, for instance, and less likely to be immunized.
“But India also has the highest number of elected female representatives in the world. A 1993 constitutional amendment meant to broaden the scope and accessibility of democracy called for the creation of directly elected local councils at the district, intermediate, and village levels, and mandated that one-third of all council seats be filled by women. The amendment is an ongoing policy experiment of sorts, on an epic scale.
“As Harvard Business School professor Lakshmi Iyer and her colleagues discovered, it's been producing encouraging results. Their research suggests that disadvantaged or minority groups in India whose members are elected to local governments have not only more of a "political voice" but also more access to and better results from the justice system.
“In the working paper The Power of Political Voice: Women's Political Representation and Crime in India, Iyer, Anandi Mani (University of Warwick), and Prachi Mishra and Petia Topalova (International Monetary Fund) examine the effect that mandated political representation for women has had on crimes against women.”
Monday, May 9, 2011
Organizational Conflict & Alignment
They are surely connected and without resolving one the other cannot be achieved, as this article from Harvard Business Review addresses.
An excerpt.
"If [fill in the person] thinks I've bought in, they're crazy."
"Even if [fill in the group] doesn't believe in our current vision, they'll believe when they see it."
"I don't think [fill in the project] even matters to our customers."
“These are not the kinds of comments any of us utter if we know "the boss" could hear them. But each of us can likely remember a time in our career where we said it, or heard it. It's tempting to think that people who aren't on board will eventually "self-select out of the organization" or, if you're the boss, you'll never have to be that hard-ass who says, "Sorry, but this is just how it is."
“Most of us generally avoid conflict. After all, who can remember getting a performance review saying, "You rock at conflict!" Instead, we reward getting along, and being good corporate citizens, and we hope that disagreements will resolve themselves. But as we've all learned in real life, hope is not a strategy. Because most of us are bad at dealing with conflict, we're also bad at fostering what must, in a successful business, come through conflict — whether overt or covert. And that's alignment.
“Alignment is among the contenders for the most overused word in business today. Why is that? It's not very sexy. Out of curiosity, I ran it through a search engine and what did I get? Wait for it... wheel alignment.
“Ooh, yeah. Sexy.
“But wheel alignment is actually an apt metaphor for organizational alignment. In a nutshell, wheel alignment is a matter of adjusting the angles of the wheels so that they are perpendicular to the ground and parallel to each other. The purpose of these adjustments is maximum tire life and a vehicle that tracks true when driving along a straight and level road. When a car is out of alignment, we get rapid tire wear, or a vehicle that pulls away from a straight line. The driver wastes time and resources fighting to keep the car on course. A shock to the system — hitting a pothole, say — can throw a car that's well-aligned out of alignment.”
An excerpt.
"If [fill in the person] thinks I've bought in, they're crazy."
"Even if [fill in the group] doesn't believe in our current vision, they'll believe when they see it."
"I don't think [fill in the project] even matters to our customers."
“These are not the kinds of comments any of us utter if we know "the boss" could hear them. But each of us can likely remember a time in our career where we said it, or heard it. It's tempting to think that people who aren't on board will eventually "self-select out of the organization" or, if you're the boss, you'll never have to be that hard-ass who says, "Sorry, but this is just how it is."
“Most of us generally avoid conflict. After all, who can remember getting a performance review saying, "You rock at conflict!" Instead, we reward getting along, and being good corporate citizens, and we hope that disagreements will resolve themselves. But as we've all learned in real life, hope is not a strategy. Because most of us are bad at dealing with conflict, we're also bad at fostering what must, in a successful business, come through conflict — whether overt or covert. And that's alignment.
“Alignment is among the contenders for the most overused word in business today. Why is that? It's not very sexy. Out of curiosity, I ran it through a search engine and what did I get? Wait for it... wheel alignment.
“Ooh, yeah. Sexy.
“But wheel alignment is actually an apt metaphor for organizational alignment. In a nutshell, wheel alignment is a matter of adjusting the angles of the wheels so that they are perpendicular to the ground and parallel to each other. The purpose of these adjustments is maximum tire life and a vehicle that tracks true when driving along a straight and level road. When a car is out of alignment, we get rapid tire wear, or a vehicle that pulls away from a straight line. The driver wastes time and resources fighting to keep the car on course. A shock to the system — hitting a pothole, say — can throw a car that's well-aligned out of alignment.”
Thursday, May 5, 2011
American Philanthropy, European Perspective
In this article from Stanford Social Innovation Review (free access until 5/11 then requires a subscription, well worth it by the way) , the author examines the state of philanthropy since Democracy in America, which everyone in nonprofit work should have a copy of.
An excerpt from the article.
“The locus classicus of European bewilderment with the United States is Alexis de Tocqueville’s seminal study Democracy in America, first published in 1835. Some of the original wonder at the American way of life has never left Europeans. Somehow the English colonies pulled off a societal experiment, which so far Europeans had dreamed of only in complex works of political philosophy or smothered in the bloodshed of failed revolutions. In this new land of milk and honey, commoners could make a fortune, citizens united in liberty to pursue matters of mutual gain, and equality ran deeper than anywhere else.
“Much has changed in 175 years. And yet a quick glance at the latest thinking about not-for-profit management and philanthropy reveals some profound differences between the ways American and European practitioners look at today’s major societal challenges.
“I went to Stanford University last fall to attend “Leading During Times of Change,” a nonprofit management conference organized by this magazine and the Association of Fundraising Professionals. I was with a group of peers from the Dutch charity sector, leaders in the fields of child welfare, health care, and philanthropic management. We enjoyed an excellent seminar complemented with instructive field visits to nonprofit organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area.
“What probably struck me most during our visit is the almost unquestioned belief Americans have in the value of an entrepreneurial approach to just about everything—and with it, a deep-seated suspicion of anything that smells of government. Hospitals are better off if they are run like health care businesses, with clients rather than patients. Unemployment is best tackled by social entrepreneurs, who help people set up their own (small) businesses. Philanthropy is largely redefined as social innovation. And market failures are often seen as the root cause of societal problems. An entire worldview transpires through these assumptions, a worldview I only partly share.
ACT AS A CATALYST
“I believe that the three main actors in society must all pay their dues. Businesses create economic value, provide jobs, and lay the basis for material prosperity. Governments set the stage, create and maintain a level playing field, pass laws, make sure there is an independent judiciary, keep us away from war and crime, collect taxes, protect the weak and vulnerable, and generally look after the public good. Civil society provides the checks and balances that are needed to hold government accountable and businesses transparent. It is that most valued place in democratic society where citizens rally together to pursue a common goal on a voluntary basis beyond the nucleus of their family or the context of their employer or political party.
“In my preferred blueprint, civil society organizations are privately funded, to prevent collusion or mission creep; governments leave the provision of commercial services to entrepreneurs; and businessmen mind their business rather than tell us how to live or who should lead. Seen from this perspective, a thriving civil society is a good indicator of the health and wealth of any democracy. For nonprofit leaders, it is important to figure out where you stand in this tangled trio, to determine what type of mission you will try to accomplish and which management principles you will adopt before you frame an issue.”
An excerpt from the article.
“The locus classicus of European bewilderment with the United States is Alexis de Tocqueville’s seminal study Democracy in America, first published in 1835. Some of the original wonder at the American way of life has never left Europeans. Somehow the English colonies pulled off a societal experiment, which so far Europeans had dreamed of only in complex works of political philosophy or smothered in the bloodshed of failed revolutions. In this new land of milk and honey, commoners could make a fortune, citizens united in liberty to pursue matters of mutual gain, and equality ran deeper than anywhere else.
“Much has changed in 175 years. And yet a quick glance at the latest thinking about not-for-profit management and philanthropy reveals some profound differences between the ways American and European practitioners look at today’s major societal challenges.
“I went to Stanford University last fall to attend “Leading During Times of Change,” a nonprofit management conference organized by this magazine and the Association of Fundraising Professionals. I was with a group of peers from the Dutch charity sector, leaders in the fields of child welfare, health care, and philanthropic management. We enjoyed an excellent seminar complemented with instructive field visits to nonprofit organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area.
“What probably struck me most during our visit is the almost unquestioned belief Americans have in the value of an entrepreneurial approach to just about everything—and with it, a deep-seated suspicion of anything that smells of government. Hospitals are better off if they are run like health care businesses, with clients rather than patients. Unemployment is best tackled by social entrepreneurs, who help people set up their own (small) businesses. Philanthropy is largely redefined as social innovation. And market failures are often seen as the root cause of societal problems. An entire worldview transpires through these assumptions, a worldview I only partly share.
ACT AS A CATALYST
“I believe that the three main actors in society must all pay their dues. Businesses create economic value, provide jobs, and lay the basis for material prosperity. Governments set the stage, create and maintain a level playing field, pass laws, make sure there is an independent judiciary, keep us away from war and crime, collect taxes, protect the weak and vulnerable, and generally look after the public good. Civil society provides the checks and balances that are needed to hold government accountable and businesses transparent. It is that most valued place in democratic society where citizens rally together to pursue a common goal on a voluntary basis beyond the nucleus of their family or the context of their employer or political party.
“In my preferred blueprint, civil society organizations are privately funded, to prevent collusion or mission creep; governments leave the provision of commercial services to entrepreneurs; and businessmen mind their business rather than tell us how to live or who should lead. Seen from this perspective, a thriving civil society is a good indicator of the health and wealth of any democracy. For nonprofit leaders, it is important to figure out where you stand in this tangled trio, to determine what type of mission you will try to accomplish and which management principles you will adopt before you frame an issue.”
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Sector Shifting
Nonprofit to private, private to nonprofit, government partnering with nonprofits and forprofits, and combinations of all; what matters is the mission, the porpose, and the best way to get it done, in this case, it's all about farming and gardening education, as reported by the Tacoma News Tribune from Bellingham, Washington.
An excerpt.
“EVERSON - Cloud Mountain Farm is going through big changes, but they're not yet visible to passers-by.
“Owners Tom and Cheryl Thornton plan to sell their popular business to a yet-to-be-determined entity that will convert their 20-acre farm into a nonprofit center to provide education and hands-on training to new and experienced farmers and gardeners.
“The couple, who started Cloud Mountain as a commercial orchard in 1978, will continue to work and live at the farm, and Cheryl Thornton will sit on the center's new board of directors.
“They're already well-known for offering workshops and other educational programs, and for experimenting with crops and growing techniques, all while diversifying their farm nestled against the western flank of Sumas Mountain.
"It's a continuation and expansion of what we're already doing," Cheryl Thornton said. "The center brings it full circle."
“The transaction is being handled by Whatcom Community Foundation, which manages numerous funds, including at least two geared to helping local agriculture - the Sustainable Whatcom Fund and the Whatcom Farm Incubator Fund.”
An excerpt.
“EVERSON - Cloud Mountain Farm is going through big changes, but they're not yet visible to passers-by.
“Owners Tom and Cheryl Thornton plan to sell their popular business to a yet-to-be-determined entity that will convert their 20-acre farm into a nonprofit center to provide education and hands-on training to new and experienced farmers and gardeners.
“The couple, who started Cloud Mountain as a commercial orchard in 1978, will continue to work and live at the farm, and Cheryl Thornton will sit on the center's new board of directors.
“They're already well-known for offering workshops and other educational programs, and for experimenting with crops and growing techniques, all while diversifying their farm nestled against the western flank of Sumas Mountain.
"It's a continuation and expansion of what we're already doing," Cheryl Thornton said. "The center brings it full circle."
“The transaction is being handled by Whatcom Community Foundation, which manages numerous funds, including at least two geared to helping local agriculture - the Sustainable Whatcom Fund and the Whatcom Farm Incubator Fund.”
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Financial Advice for Nonprofits
As good for organizations as it is for families and businesses, keep a reserve, as this article from the Chronicle of Philanthropy advises.
An excerpt.
“My two most recent posts flagged operating reserves as an important issue that is often neglected by nonprofit boards and gave an explanation of what they are and why they matter.
“Since 2009, when the Meyer Foundation supported an Urban Institute study of the operating reserves of nonprofits in Washington, I’ve spoken about the topic of operating reserves at numerous conferences and other gatherings. I usually try to make most of the same points and arguments covered in the two earlier blog posts.
“Whenever I speak about this topic, the reactions from board members and executive directors in the audience are almost always the same. They look bewildered, as if I’d just suggested that they try to obtain a pound of enriched uranium or an albino giraffe. And then, hesitantly, someone will ask, “How do we get these ‘operating reserves’ you keep preaching about?”
“My answer almost always seems to disappoint, perhaps because of its simplicity. The most reliable way to build reserves is by operating at a modest surplus (bringing in more money than you spend) consistently over time.
“Consider this illustration: If an organization with an annual budget of $1-million runs a $50,000 surplus (5 percent of its budget) every year for five years, its accumulated surplus would be $250,000—or three months of operating expenses. If $50,000 seems too ambitious, even half as much would get the organization to $250,000in 10 years.”
An excerpt.
“My two most recent posts flagged operating reserves as an important issue that is often neglected by nonprofit boards and gave an explanation of what they are and why they matter.
“Since 2009, when the Meyer Foundation supported an Urban Institute study of the operating reserves of nonprofits in Washington, I’ve spoken about the topic of operating reserves at numerous conferences and other gatherings. I usually try to make most of the same points and arguments covered in the two earlier blog posts.
“Whenever I speak about this topic, the reactions from board members and executive directors in the audience are almost always the same. They look bewildered, as if I’d just suggested that they try to obtain a pound of enriched uranium or an albino giraffe. And then, hesitantly, someone will ask, “How do we get these ‘operating reserves’ you keep preaching about?”
“My answer almost always seems to disappoint, perhaps because of its simplicity. The most reliable way to build reserves is by operating at a modest surplus (bringing in more money than you spend) consistently over time.
“Consider this illustration: If an organization with an annual budget of $1-million runs a $50,000 surplus (5 percent of its budget) every year for five years, its accumulated surplus would be $250,000—or three months of operating expenses. If $50,000 seems too ambitious, even half as much would get the organization to $250,000in 10 years.”
Monday, May 2, 2011
Poverty News
This story from the San Francisco Chronicle reports on the coverage of poverty issues.
An excerpt.
“Considering the unparalleled wealth of this nation, we live in awful times for far too many people, and they show little sign of getting better soon. As a journalist, I feel there has never been a more critical time for reporting on poverty and its byproducts of homelessness and despair.
“Middle-class people are getting crushed into the working class, and the working class is getting crushed into the working poor. They’re all putting in more hours for diminishing pay, and the outlook for the future is for more of the same.
“Unless, of course, you are rich. For multi-millionaires, these are boom times—the culmination of 30-plus years of Reaganomics and its descendants pushing income to top earners while raising taxes and fees on the lower end of the economic scale.
“The average CEO made about 40 times more than the average worker when I became a professional reporter three decades ago. Today that ratio is about 350 to one. Today, the wealthiest one percent of Americans gets a quarter of the nation’s income. When I became a reporter, they got a tenth.
“That kind of split between the wealthy and the middle and poor hasn’t been seen in America since the late 1920s—just before the Great Depression.
“Other times have critically needed poverty reporting of course, such as the 1950s and ’60s when the War on Poverty and civil rights movement were being crafted. But none more so than now. Between America’s growing have-and-have-not split and our rapidly declining international economic prowess eroding the ability to bounce back, we face a turning point that demands intensive and immediate ground-level attention to the struggling middle and under classes.
“But that is more easily hoped for than done. The trouble with reporting about poverty for most news outlets is that it is messy. It always has been.
“Poverty reporting comes automatically freighted with left-and-right wing arguments that paint the economic landscape in black and white terms and sling contrasting statistics and anecdote-driven contentions to prove their points. You have to give them all attention, sorting through the mountains of official and unofficial accounts to get to some bedrock facts.”
An excerpt.
“Considering the unparalleled wealth of this nation, we live in awful times for far too many people, and they show little sign of getting better soon. As a journalist, I feel there has never been a more critical time for reporting on poverty and its byproducts of homelessness and despair.
“Middle-class people are getting crushed into the working class, and the working class is getting crushed into the working poor. They’re all putting in more hours for diminishing pay, and the outlook for the future is for more of the same.
“Unless, of course, you are rich. For multi-millionaires, these are boom times—the culmination of 30-plus years of Reaganomics and its descendants pushing income to top earners while raising taxes and fees on the lower end of the economic scale.
“The average CEO made about 40 times more than the average worker when I became a professional reporter three decades ago. Today that ratio is about 350 to one. Today, the wealthiest one percent of Americans gets a quarter of the nation’s income. When I became a reporter, they got a tenth.
“That kind of split between the wealthy and the middle and poor hasn’t been seen in America since the late 1920s—just before the Great Depression.
“Other times have critically needed poverty reporting of course, such as the 1950s and ’60s when the War on Poverty and civil rights movement were being crafted. But none more so than now. Between America’s growing have-and-have-not split and our rapidly declining international economic prowess eroding the ability to bounce back, we face a turning point that demands intensive and immediate ground-level attention to the struggling middle and under classes.
“But that is more easily hoped for than done. The trouble with reporting about poverty for most news outlets is that it is messy. It always has been.
“Poverty reporting comes automatically freighted with left-and-right wing arguments that paint the economic landscape in black and white terms and sling contrasting statistics and anecdote-driven contentions to prove their points. You have to give them all attention, sorting through the mountains of official and unofficial accounts to get to some bedrock facts.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
