This article from Nonprofit About.com begins with the too often practice of not thanking donors, something that should be done immediately regardless of how the donation came.
From my perspective, if an organization does not thank donors immediately and well, they virtually negate their foundational mission, within which their organizational mission is embedded, of community service.
An excerpt from the article.
“A friend donated a considerable amount of money through payroll deduction to her local public radio station. For that amount, she was supposed to receive a thermos with the station's logo on it.
“When she didn't receive the gift nor any kind of thank you from the station, she called and asked about it. The woman on the phone said, "Oh, well we don't send thank you's for donations through payroll deduction." She didn't know anything about the gift.
“That was it...no apology...no "Let me put you through to someone who can help." Apparently, they didn't send the advertised gift for payroll deduction donations either because it never came. Why payroll deduction would have made any difference at all is perplexing. My friend was so infuriated that she never gave another cent and has plenty to say about the radio station whenever possible.
“I suspect that the woman my friend spoke to did not know what she was talking about, and that if the development department had known about the conversation they would be horrified.
“Overall there was a disconnect on several levels. What is their policy on thank you's? Is there a glitch in the fulfillment process that resulted in the gift not being sent? Why hadn't the woman on the phone been properly trained so that she knew the policies and what to do when her help was not enough? Why did she not appreciate the importance of a donor call such as that one?”
Showing posts with label Community. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Community. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Author in Sacramento Today
Excellent opportunity to hear from author Dan Pallotta—his new book, Uncharitable: How Restraints on Nonprofits Undermine Their Potential is excellent and I posted on it in May—who will be in Sacramento later today, as reported by the Sacramento Business Journal.
An excerpt.
“As Sacramento kicks off a multiyear campaign to boost local charitable giving, the community gets a pep talk Thursday from a national philanthropy expert who challenges the way nonprofits are measured and regulated.
“Dan Pallotta, a Harvard professor and author of a provocative book on philanthropy, will speak from 5 to 8 p.m. Thursday at the Tsakopoulos Library Galleria. Tickets purchased in advance from the Nonprofit Resource Center ’s website are $35. Tickets at the door are $40. Pallotta will answer questions and sign his book after his talk.
“The Association of Fundraising Professionals, the Nonprofit Resource Center and philanthropists invited Pallotta to speak in Sacramento with the hope of convincing Sacramentans to think about philanthropy in new ways and to increase philanthropic support of this region’s nonprofits.
“The talk is in conjunction with the launch last month of the GiveLocalNow initiative that seeks to boost the amount given annually to local charities by $250 million.
“The public giving campaign launched after research found that the region lags the national giving average, particularly for households earning $200,000 or more.
“In the foreword of his most recent book, “Uncharitable: How Restraints on Nonprofits Undermine Their Potential,” Pallotta argues for “giving charity equal rights with the rest of the economic world and allowing it to use the system everyone else uses to get things done — free market capitalism.”
An excerpt.
“As Sacramento kicks off a multiyear campaign to boost local charitable giving, the community gets a pep talk Thursday from a national philanthropy expert who challenges the way nonprofits are measured and regulated.
“Dan Pallotta, a Harvard professor and author of a provocative book on philanthropy, will speak from 5 to 8 p.m. Thursday at the Tsakopoulos Library Galleria. Tickets purchased in advance from the Nonprofit Resource Center ’s website are $35. Tickets at the door are $40. Pallotta will answer questions and sign his book after his talk.
“The Association of Fundraising Professionals, the Nonprofit Resource Center and philanthropists invited Pallotta to speak in Sacramento with the hope of convincing Sacramentans to think about philanthropy in new ways and to increase philanthropic support of this region’s nonprofits.
“The talk is in conjunction with the launch last month of the GiveLocalNow initiative that seeks to boost the amount given annually to local charities by $250 million.
“The public giving campaign launched after research found that the region lags the national giving average, particularly for households earning $200,000 or more.
“In the foreword of his most recent book, “Uncharitable: How Restraints on Nonprofits Undermine Their Potential,” Pallotta argues for “giving charity equal rights with the rest of the economic world and allowing it to use the system everyone else uses to get things done — free market capitalism.”
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Story of a Philanthropist
The Philanthropy Roundtable Magazine excels at publishing wonderful stories of philanthropists, how they came to be so and the causes they believe in.
This recent story is another great look at a philanthropist.
An excerpt.
“Hank Rowan was shocked. He paused for a moment, not sure if he had heard correctly. Sometimes he wondered why he even bothered with his hearing aid. No, he thought to himself, I’m pretty sure I heard that correctly. Astonishing, he thought, really astonishing. “This,” he finally told his guests, “is extraordinary.”
“It was early March 2008. The men had gathered at Rowan’s offices in suburban Rancocas, New Jersey, 20 miles east of Philadelphia. Outside the air was warm and wet, hinting at an early spring. The visitors were from nearby Media, Pennsylvania. They represented the Williamson Free School of Mechanical Trades. Rowan was one of their foremost benefactors.
“Rowan was first introduced to the school by Mike Piotrowicz, a Williamson trustee and booster. What Rowan found was a residential junior college dedicated to teaching skilled trades: carpentry, masonry, painting, landscaping, metalwork, and power plant management. Admissions are limited to unmarried men under the age of 20, all of whom come from families at no more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level. Each of the school’s 275 students receives a full scholarship.
“Rowan also knew that the 120-year-old school was facing an increasingly uncertain future. Williamson accepts no federal support, and the (now discontinued) stipend it received from the state came to just $64,000 annually. Over the course of the previous decade, its endowment had grown 20 percent, while its operating costs had risen 60 percent. Capital improvements were needed across the century-old campus. Fundraising was consuming ever more time and energy among the school’s senior leadership. The board became increasingly uncomfortable with the financial outlook. In order to secure the long-term viability of the school, it approved a $50 million capital campaign—a seemingly insurmountable sum for a school whose most successful campaign had netted $11 million.
“This, Rowan decided, is a unique opportunity to help a unique charity. In November 2007, five months before the meeting in his office, Rowan had issued a $5 million challenge to Williamson—in nominal terms, the largest gift in the school’s history. It was carefully structured, intending to open new funding sources for the school. It promised to match, dollar for dollar, any gifts from first-time donors, any gifts from people whose lifetime giving was less than $5,000, and any other gift at least five times larger than the previous largest gift. “Try this out,” Rowan said at the time. “I’d like to see how you do.”
“On that warm March morning, Rowan had expected an update about the challenge grant. He knew that the school had raised about $2 million so far, and he was curious how much more progress had been made. But the men who went to Rancocas on that March morning had unexpected news for Rowan. Paul Reid, then the president of Williamson, delivered the message.
“Reid told Rowan that he had visited another local philanthropist about the challenge. Rowan didn’t recognize the other man’s name. This gentleman, Reid continued, had a counter-offer of his own. If I were to put up $20 million, he had proposed, would Hank Rowan be willing to match me?
“Forge of Experience
“Henry Rowan is not easily surprised. An engineer by temperament as well as training, he has long been a methodical planner and a careful thinker. Tall, with erect posture and bright, alert eyes, the 87-year-old Rowan still strides purposefully and speaks in crisply formed sentences. Those traits have served him well throughout his storied career. Rowan is the founder of Inductotherm Industries, the global leader in the manufacture of induction systems for melting, heating, holding, and pouring metal.
“If anything, Rowan is accustomed to surprising others. In August 1945, for example, he dumbfounded the head finance officer at Roswell Air Force Base. Rowan had been training to be a bomber pilot since June 1943. The Germans surrendered shortly after he qualified on the B-17 Flying Fortress. He never deployed overseas. After V-J Day, the other pilots on base took it easy, passing time by playing cards, shooting pool, or knocking around volleyballs. Not Hank Rowan. He realized that he knew nothing about making payroll, but thought it was a skill that might someday be useful. So Rowan badgered the finance officer until he was given permission to spend his last two months in the military handling personnel compensation.
“After he was discharged, Rowan and his new wife, Betty, packed their belongings into a beat-up 1929 Chevy Coupe. In a car that topped out at 28 miles per hour, stopping five times along the way to retighten the engine bearings, they puttered from New Mexico to Massachusetts. There, Rowan re-enrolled at MIT. Supported by the G.I. Bill and savings from his service pay, he completed his degree in electrical engineering in 20 months—during which time, Betty gave birth to their first two children. The day after graduation, Rowan went to work. He took a job with Ajax Electrothermic Corporation in Trenton, New Jersey, then the world’s leading manufacturer of induction furnaces. Rowan was excited to come on board.
“He was soon disappointed. Since the discovery of the induction melting process in 1915, Ajax had enjoyed a virtual monopoly on the market. The company had grown comfortable, complacent. It expected customers to adjust to its expectations, rather than the other way around. Rowan chafed at its self-satisfaction, leaving the company in August 1952. But his restless mind kept grasping at missed opportunities, at the improvements that Ajax had always been reluctant to pursue. In April 1953, a friend and former customer named Paul Foley approached Rowan, telling him about his need for a furnace to melt beryllium copper. Rowan was plenty busy, but he was interested in the technical challenge. Over the next six weeks, he and Betty spent their free time in the backyard, building a 50-pound induction furnace.
“That furnace marked the launch of Inductotherm Industries. On June 6, 1954—exactly 10 years after D-Day—Rowan returned to the induction business as CEO, chief engineer, and, with Foley, half-owner of Inductotherm.”
This recent story is another great look at a philanthropist.
An excerpt.
“Hank Rowan was shocked. He paused for a moment, not sure if he had heard correctly. Sometimes he wondered why he even bothered with his hearing aid. No, he thought to himself, I’m pretty sure I heard that correctly. Astonishing, he thought, really astonishing. “This,” he finally told his guests, “is extraordinary.”
“It was early March 2008. The men had gathered at Rowan’s offices in suburban Rancocas, New Jersey, 20 miles east of Philadelphia. Outside the air was warm and wet, hinting at an early spring. The visitors were from nearby Media, Pennsylvania. They represented the Williamson Free School of Mechanical Trades. Rowan was one of their foremost benefactors.
“Rowan was first introduced to the school by Mike Piotrowicz, a Williamson trustee and booster. What Rowan found was a residential junior college dedicated to teaching skilled trades: carpentry, masonry, painting, landscaping, metalwork, and power plant management. Admissions are limited to unmarried men under the age of 20, all of whom come from families at no more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level. Each of the school’s 275 students receives a full scholarship.
“Rowan also knew that the 120-year-old school was facing an increasingly uncertain future. Williamson accepts no federal support, and the (now discontinued) stipend it received from the state came to just $64,000 annually. Over the course of the previous decade, its endowment had grown 20 percent, while its operating costs had risen 60 percent. Capital improvements were needed across the century-old campus. Fundraising was consuming ever more time and energy among the school’s senior leadership. The board became increasingly uncomfortable with the financial outlook. In order to secure the long-term viability of the school, it approved a $50 million capital campaign—a seemingly insurmountable sum for a school whose most successful campaign had netted $11 million.
“This, Rowan decided, is a unique opportunity to help a unique charity. In November 2007, five months before the meeting in his office, Rowan had issued a $5 million challenge to Williamson—in nominal terms, the largest gift in the school’s history. It was carefully structured, intending to open new funding sources for the school. It promised to match, dollar for dollar, any gifts from first-time donors, any gifts from people whose lifetime giving was less than $5,000, and any other gift at least five times larger than the previous largest gift. “Try this out,” Rowan said at the time. “I’d like to see how you do.”
“On that warm March morning, Rowan had expected an update about the challenge grant. He knew that the school had raised about $2 million so far, and he was curious how much more progress had been made. But the men who went to Rancocas on that March morning had unexpected news for Rowan. Paul Reid, then the president of Williamson, delivered the message.
“Reid told Rowan that he had visited another local philanthropist about the challenge. Rowan didn’t recognize the other man’s name. This gentleman, Reid continued, had a counter-offer of his own. If I were to put up $20 million, he had proposed, would Hank Rowan be willing to match me?
“Forge of Experience
“Henry Rowan is not easily surprised. An engineer by temperament as well as training, he has long been a methodical planner and a careful thinker. Tall, with erect posture and bright, alert eyes, the 87-year-old Rowan still strides purposefully and speaks in crisply formed sentences. Those traits have served him well throughout his storied career. Rowan is the founder of Inductotherm Industries, the global leader in the manufacture of induction systems for melting, heating, holding, and pouring metal.
“If anything, Rowan is accustomed to surprising others. In August 1945, for example, he dumbfounded the head finance officer at Roswell Air Force Base. Rowan had been training to be a bomber pilot since June 1943. The Germans surrendered shortly after he qualified on the B-17 Flying Fortress. He never deployed overseas. After V-J Day, the other pilots on base took it easy, passing time by playing cards, shooting pool, or knocking around volleyballs. Not Hank Rowan. He realized that he knew nothing about making payroll, but thought it was a skill that might someday be useful. So Rowan badgered the finance officer until he was given permission to spend his last two months in the military handling personnel compensation.
“After he was discharged, Rowan and his new wife, Betty, packed their belongings into a beat-up 1929 Chevy Coupe. In a car that topped out at 28 miles per hour, stopping five times along the way to retighten the engine bearings, they puttered from New Mexico to Massachusetts. There, Rowan re-enrolled at MIT. Supported by the G.I. Bill and savings from his service pay, he completed his degree in electrical engineering in 20 months—during which time, Betty gave birth to their first two children. The day after graduation, Rowan went to work. He took a job with Ajax Electrothermic Corporation in Trenton, New Jersey, then the world’s leading manufacturer of induction furnaces. Rowan was excited to come on board.
“He was soon disappointed. Since the discovery of the induction melting process in 1915, Ajax had enjoyed a virtual monopoly on the market. The company had grown comfortable, complacent. It expected customers to adjust to its expectations, rather than the other way around. Rowan chafed at its self-satisfaction, leaving the company in August 1952. But his restless mind kept grasping at missed opportunities, at the improvements that Ajax had always been reluctant to pursue. In April 1953, a friend and former customer named Paul Foley approached Rowan, telling him about his need for a furnace to melt beryllium copper. Rowan was plenty busy, but he was interested in the technical challenge. Over the next six weeks, he and Betty spent their free time in the backyard, building a 50-pound induction furnace.
“That furnace marked the launch of Inductotherm Industries. On June 6, 1954—exactly 10 years after D-Day—Rowan returned to the induction business as CEO, chief engineer, and, with Foley, half-owner of Inductotherm.”
Monday, June 13, 2011
From Career to Calling
If you are fortunate enough to be combining both already, this story will validate your effort, but for those making that shift, this article is an excellent resource from Stanford Social Innovation Review.
An excerpt.
“John Kerr spent most of his life working for Boston’s main public television station. After 40 years, he stuffed his possessions into a storage locker, sold his house, and headed for Wyoming—not to retire but to fulfill his dream of working in the national parks.
“Today, Kerr is a summertime park ranger in Yellowstone, keeping people and bears away from each other. How did he get from WGBH fundraiser to part-time park employee? By talking his way into an internship designed for people almost half a century younger.
“Kerr, and millions of others his age, are wending their way into uncharted territory, reaching the spot where middle age used to end and old age once began. They want work that matters, but they’re finding it’s a do-it-yourself project with few pathways and little help getting from what’s past to what’s next.
“It shouldn’t be so hard. The surge of people into this new, encore stage of life—after midlife and before true old age—is one of the most important phenomena of the new century. Never before have so many people had so much experience—as well as the time and capacity—to do something significant with it. That’s the great potential payoff on all the progress we’ve made in extending lives.”
An excerpt.
“John Kerr spent most of his life working for Boston’s main public television station. After 40 years, he stuffed his possessions into a storage locker, sold his house, and headed for Wyoming—not to retire but to fulfill his dream of working in the national parks.
“Today, Kerr is a summertime park ranger in Yellowstone, keeping people and bears away from each other. How did he get from WGBH fundraiser to part-time park employee? By talking his way into an internship designed for people almost half a century younger.
“Kerr, and millions of others his age, are wending their way into uncharted territory, reaching the spot where middle age used to end and old age once began. They want work that matters, but they’re finding it’s a do-it-yourself project with few pathways and little help getting from what’s past to what’s next.
“It shouldn’t be so hard. The surge of people into this new, encore stage of life—after midlife and before true old age—is one of the most important phenomena of the new century. Never before have so many people had so much experience—as well as the time and capacity—to do something significant with it. That’s the great potential payoff on all the progress we’ve made in extending lives.”
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.”
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.”
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.”
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
De Tocqueville & Neighborhood Associations
The neighborhood association, one example of which we posted on yesterday, is an American venue remarked on by Count Alexis De Tocqueville, who came to America in the early 1800’s, met with many of the founders and wrote one of the most perceptive books ever written about America and nonprofit organizations.
Here is but a small part of what he said about voluntary associations—nonprofits, in the remarkable book he wrote, Democracy in America.
“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools. Finally, if it is a question of bringing to light a truth or developing a sentiment with the support of a great example, they associate. Everywhere that, at the head of a new undertaking, you see the government in France and a great lord in England, count on it that you will perceive an association in the United States.
“I have since traveled through England, from which the Americans took some of their laws and many of their usages, and it appeared to me that there they were very far from making as constant and as skilled a use of association.
“It often happens that the English execute very great things in isolation, whereas there is scarcely an undertaking so small that Americans do not unite for it. It is evident that the former consider association as a powerful means of action; but the latter seem to see in it the sole means they have of acting.
“Thus the most democratic country on earth is found to be, above all, the one where men in our day have most perfected the art of pursuing the object of their common desires in common and have applied this new science to the most objects. Does this result from an accident or could it be that there in fact exists a necessary relation between associations and equality?”
Alexis de Tocqueville. (2000). Translation by H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop. (pp. 489-490)
Here is but a small part of what he said about voluntary associations—nonprofits, in the remarkable book he wrote, Democracy in America.
“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools. Finally, if it is a question of bringing to light a truth or developing a sentiment with the support of a great example, they associate. Everywhere that, at the head of a new undertaking, you see the government in France and a great lord in England, count on it that you will perceive an association in the United States.
“I have since traveled through England, from which the Americans took some of their laws and many of their usages, and it appeared to me that there they were very far from making as constant and as skilled a use of association.
“It often happens that the English execute very great things in isolation, whereas there is scarcely an undertaking so small that Americans do not unite for it. It is evident that the former consider association as a powerful means of action; but the latter seem to see in it the sole means they have of acting.
“Thus the most democratic country on earth is found to be, above all, the one where men in our day have most perfected the art of pursuing the object of their common desires in common and have applied this new science to the most objects. Does this result from an accident or could it be that there in fact exists a necessary relation between associations and equality?”
Alexis de Tocqueville. (2000). Translation by H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop. (pp. 489-490)
Monday, April 4, 2011
Neighborhood Associations & Social Media
In an excellent use of technology to keep neighborhoods safe, as reported by the Sacramento Bee, using social media to keep track of neighborhood crime and inform fellow residents, is a wise strategy.
An excerpt.
“Meet Robert Earl Randall, or "Bobby," as he is known to friends and police.
“Randall, 44, has amassed a 12-page rap sheet that includes arrests on charges of burglary, driving under the influence, possession of controlled substances, impersonation, writing a phony prescription, receiving stolen property and taking a vehicle without permission.
“Last week, found sleeping in a broken-down camper parked next to his mother's house off Opal Lane in the Hagginwood area, he was arrested again as a suspect in two additional burglaries.
"I'm not trying to be a criminal," Randall told Sacramento County sheriff's Sgt. Chris Joachim as he sat handcuffed the patrol car. "I don't want to go to prison."
“Randall is one of the people you lock your doors against. But, increasingly, Sacramento-area residents are deciding that is not enough.
“Some are turning to online crime-tracking tools or creating neighborhood watch groups on the Internet that give them instant access to crimes reported in their neighborhoods and suspicious activity.
“Susanne Burns is one of them. The Carmichael resident decided she had to do something after her home was burglarized last May while her family slept.
“The family had left vehicles in the driveway to make room for a pre-prom party in the garage. The burglars apparently broke into her husband's truck and used the garage door opener to get inside the garage and then the house.
“When she discovered the burglary, Burns followed the traditional route, setting up a Neighborhood Watch group of homes in her gated community.
"We started emailing and this list grew basically out of control," she said. "It started with me emailing the 22 homes in our little community. It just mushroomed, and I think that's when it hit me."
"It" was the idea of harnessing Facebook. The result is Carmichael Watchgroup, a page on the social networking site that has 342 members and notifies residents of community meetings with the Sheriff's Department, crime-tracking websites and criminal reports.
“News about stolen bikes, garage break-ins and other crimes are posted regularly. At Christmas, video from one home's security cameras was posted showing a burglar breaking into a house and leaving on a bicycle with stolen property.
“Elsewhere, communities from Granite Bay to Natomas have set up email alerts to keep residents abreast of what is going on in their neighborhoods, and several area law enforcement agencies are contracting with companies to put crime data online and make it available to anyone for free.”
An excerpt.
“Meet Robert Earl Randall, or "Bobby," as he is known to friends and police.
“Randall, 44, has amassed a 12-page rap sheet that includes arrests on charges of burglary, driving under the influence, possession of controlled substances, impersonation, writing a phony prescription, receiving stolen property and taking a vehicle without permission.
“Last week, found sleeping in a broken-down camper parked next to his mother's house off Opal Lane in the Hagginwood area, he was arrested again as a suspect in two additional burglaries.
"I'm not trying to be a criminal," Randall told Sacramento County sheriff's Sgt. Chris Joachim as he sat handcuffed the patrol car. "I don't want to go to prison."
“Randall is one of the people you lock your doors against. But, increasingly, Sacramento-area residents are deciding that is not enough.
“Some are turning to online crime-tracking tools or creating neighborhood watch groups on the Internet that give them instant access to crimes reported in their neighborhoods and suspicious activity.
“Susanne Burns is one of them. The Carmichael resident decided she had to do something after her home was burglarized last May while her family slept.
“The family had left vehicles in the driveway to make room for a pre-prom party in the garage. The burglars apparently broke into her husband's truck and used the garage door opener to get inside the garage and then the house.
“When she discovered the burglary, Burns followed the traditional route, setting up a Neighborhood Watch group of homes in her gated community.
"We started emailing and this list grew basically out of control," she said. "It started with me emailing the 22 homes in our little community. It just mushroomed, and I think that's when it hit me."
"It" was the idea of harnessing Facebook. The result is Carmichael Watchgroup, a page on the social networking site that has 342 members and notifies residents of community meetings with the Sheriff's Department, crime-tracking websites and criminal reports.
“News about stolen bikes, garage break-ins and other crimes are posted regularly. At Christmas, video from one home's security cameras was posted showing a burglar breaking into a house and leaving on a bicycle with stolen property.
“Elsewhere, communities from Granite Bay to Natomas have set up email alerts to keep residents abreast of what is going on in their neighborhoods, and several area law enforcement agencies are contracting with companies to put crime data online and make it available to anyone for free.”
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Speaking Truth
A good article from the Nonprofit Quarterly about the consequences of telling the truth versus lying, within organizations.
An excerpt.
“We have all experienced the public lie that goes unchallenged. It may be baldly untrue but somehow accepted as the basis for action with life and death consequences. Some of our experience of public lies may be based on differences in values or perceptions, but sometimes what is said just simply violates the facts—this is disheartening and drives people out of public participation.
“The same may be said of organizations. A nonprofit may, on the surface, be making every effort to promote teamwork and “the higher good,” but if its people continue to perceive a culture that supports a different and less reliable set of operating norms and assumptions than what is written or espoused, they will not bring themselves wholly to our efforts.
“Here are some typical reasons for telling lies:
• to avoid pain or unpleasant consequences;
• to promote self-interest and a particular point of view;
• to protect the leaders or the organization;
• to perpetuate myths that hold the organization or a point of view together;
“Regardless of why they are told, untruths and lies can cause people to disengage—and they can also diminish the spirit people bring into the workplace. This leads to a sometimes massive loss of applied human intellectual and physical capital assets. A disinvestment of human spirit results in what I refer to as a Gross National People Divestiture (GNPD). The GNPD index in any organization or society can be directly related to the prevalence and magnitude of untruths told and allowed to stand. GNPD occurs when your organization’s tolerance of untruth creates a climate of cynical disbelief engendering a lack of trust in information and relationships. This automatically creates management problems that are sometimes difficult to put your finger on but are often very powerfully present nonetheless.
“Our challenge is to buck the culture and engage people in building a climate of truth telling that will lead to a newly revived work ethic and heightened individual and collective energy. In order to do this effectively, we must understand the conditions that support the emergence of truth, and understand and eliminate those that routinely undermine its presence in our organizations.”
An excerpt.
“We have all experienced the public lie that goes unchallenged. It may be baldly untrue but somehow accepted as the basis for action with life and death consequences. Some of our experience of public lies may be based on differences in values or perceptions, but sometimes what is said just simply violates the facts—this is disheartening and drives people out of public participation.
“The same may be said of organizations. A nonprofit may, on the surface, be making every effort to promote teamwork and “the higher good,” but if its people continue to perceive a culture that supports a different and less reliable set of operating norms and assumptions than what is written or espoused, they will not bring themselves wholly to our efforts.
“Here are some typical reasons for telling lies:
• to avoid pain or unpleasant consequences;
• to promote self-interest and a particular point of view;
• to protect the leaders or the organization;
• to perpetuate myths that hold the organization or a point of view together;
“Regardless of why they are told, untruths and lies can cause people to disengage—and they can also diminish the spirit people bring into the workplace. This leads to a sometimes massive loss of applied human intellectual and physical capital assets. A disinvestment of human spirit results in what I refer to as a Gross National People Divestiture (GNPD). The GNPD index in any organization or society can be directly related to the prevalence and magnitude of untruths told and allowed to stand. GNPD occurs when your organization’s tolerance of untruth creates a climate of cynical disbelief engendering a lack of trust in information and relationships. This automatically creates management problems that are sometimes difficult to put your finger on but are often very powerfully present nonetheless.
“Our challenge is to buck the culture and engage people in building a climate of truth telling that will lead to a newly revived work ethic and heightened individual and collective energy. In order to do this effectively, we must understand the conditions that support the emergence of truth, and understand and eliminate those that routinely undermine its presence in our organizations.”
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Helping Small Movie Theaters
Ideas, becoming a nonprofit is one (some of which are already being used for the few left in Sacramento) could come from this article in the Chicago Tribune.
An excerpt.
“MADISON, Wis.— The Strand is gone in Mount Horeb.
“So, too, is the Rex in Mauston and the Odeon in Beaver Dam.
“For the movie theaters that remain in downtowns around the state, the margins can be narrow, maintenance and utility costs high and the future uncertain in an age of changing technology, sleek multi-screen cinemas, Redbox movies for $1 and Netflix shows streamed directly to television.
“That's why the small theaters, most of them single-screen operations, are diversifying in an effort to maintain their tenuous hold.
“In addition to movies, some host musical concerts, plays and magicians.
“One movie theater company has a program that allows video game enthusiasts to use their PlayStation and Nintendo systems on the big screen for two hours. The $65 fee for four people includes unlimited soda and popcorn.
"It's all about finding other revenue sources," said Jeremy Patnaude, general manager of State Theatres in Platteville, which also operates theaters in Boscobel, Lancaster, Dodgeville and Menomonie. "It's utilizing what you have."
“Movies are big business. In 2009 theaters sold 1.4 billion tickets that generated $10.6 billion in revenue. The number of screens has been on the rise, but the number of locations is declining, the result of single-screen theaters closing and the construction of massive multiplex theaters, some with restaurants and their own parking ramps, according to the National Association of Theatre Owners.
“The Al. Ringling Theatre in Baraboo used to compete with multi-screen cinemas in Lake Delton and Reedsburg. But over the past year, the theater abandoned showing new releases and switched to classic and independent films. Showings have included "Casablanca" and the "Wizard of Oz." Over Labor Day weekend, "Jaws," originally released in 1975, hit the 17-by-39-foot screen. The Alfred Hitchcock thriller, "North by Northwest," is scheduled for March 25-26.
"They see (the film) the way it was meant to be seen," said Brian Heller, executive director of the historic theater owned since 1989 by a nonprofit organization. "Just because it's old doesn't mean its entertainment value has diminished."
An excerpt.
“MADISON, Wis.— The Strand is gone in Mount Horeb.
“So, too, is the Rex in Mauston and the Odeon in Beaver Dam.
“For the movie theaters that remain in downtowns around the state, the margins can be narrow, maintenance and utility costs high and the future uncertain in an age of changing technology, sleek multi-screen cinemas, Redbox movies for $1 and Netflix shows streamed directly to television.
“That's why the small theaters, most of them single-screen operations, are diversifying in an effort to maintain their tenuous hold.
“In addition to movies, some host musical concerts, plays and magicians.
“One movie theater company has a program that allows video game enthusiasts to use their PlayStation and Nintendo systems on the big screen for two hours. The $65 fee for four people includes unlimited soda and popcorn.
"It's all about finding other revenue sources," said Jeremy Patnaude, general manager of State Theatres in Platteville, which also operates theaters in Boscobel, Lancaster, Dodgeville and Menomonie. "It's utilizing what you have."
“Movies are big business. In 2009 theaters sold 1.4 billion tickets that generated $10.6 billion in revenue. The number of screens has been on the rise, but the number of locations is declining, the result of single-screen theaters closing and the construction of massive multiplex theaters, some with restaurants and their own parking ramps, according to the National Association of Theatre Owners.
“The Al. Ringling Theatre in Baraboo used to compete with multi-screen cinemas in Lake Delton and Reedsburg. But over the past year, the theater abandoned showing new releases and switched to classic and independent films. Showings have included "Casablanca" and the "Wizard of Oz." Over Labor Day weekend, "Jaws," originally released in 1975, hit the 17-by-39-foot screen. The Alfred Hitchcock thriller, "North by Northwest," is scheduled for March 25-26.
"They see (the film) the way it was meant to be seen," said Brian Heller, executive director of the historic theater owned since 1989 by a nonprofit organization. "Just because it's old doesn't mean its entertainment value has diminished."
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Nonprofit Governance
This article from the Nonprofit Quarterly describes a reality long evident within public administration and addressed in previous works such as the book by Goldsmith and Eggers (2004) Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector.
An excerpt from the Nonprofit Quarterly article.
“Many members of the nonprofit world have expressed concern that the sector has not developed new forms of governance. We have not, they complain, seen anything more than a minor variation on current designs and practices. For some time, I shared this perspective. But then I realized that this is not exactly true. We have created the “new nonprofit governance” at a new level within our communities. But we have not identified this shift because we’re so focused on the artifact that we know as “the board.”
“It used to be that boards and governance were substantially the same: the two concepts overlapped. But with time and a radically changing environment (e.g., changes in complexity, pace, scale, and nature of community problems and needs), the domain of “governance” has moved beyond the domain of “the board.” Though never stated in this way, governance and boards have greatly diverged in many of the settings where we address our most complex and demanding community needs. But in these complex environments, boards of individual organizations serve the functions of governance less and less well.
“In these environs, governance truly is leadership. And in this new generation of governance, which has most actively evolved in segments of the nonprofit sector where agencies strive to address these complex challenges, nonprofit boards are merely one element and no longer the primary “home” of the governance processes by which we address our most critical community issues.
“The scale of these complex problems has outgrown the capacity of our existing free¬standing organizations to respond—sometimes in terms of size, but especially, and more important, in terms of complexity and dynamism. Therefore, we’ve organized or developed our response at yet another level: the interorganizational alliance.
“In the new mode, the organization may well be the unit from which services are delivered, but such service delivery is designed, organized, resourced, and coordinated (in other words, governed) by the overarching network of relationships (among organizational leaders) that crosses and links all participating organizations and entities. Similar dynamics have emerged in some parts of the nonprofit policy and advocacy domain, where different organizations’ actions are orchestrated by a coordinated governance process that operates largely beyond the scope of any particular board, even as it deploys lobbying resources from various individual organizations.
“THE NEW NONPROFIT GOVERNANCE MODEL
“Governance is a function, and a board is a structure—and, as it turns out, a decreasingly central structure in the issue of new or alternative forms of governance. Don’t get me wrong; boards are still important in nonprofit governance. But, for many key community problems and issues, they’re not always appropriate as the unit of focus.
“Governance processes—processes of decision making concerning action based on and grounded in a shared sense of mission, vision, and purpose—include the functions of setting strategic direction and setting priorities; developing and allocating resources; adopting and applying rules of interunit engagement and relationships; and implementing an ongoing system of quality assurance that applies to all constituent organizations.
“In many key areas, these processes have moved above and beyond any individual nonprofit organization. If organizations do not work as an integral part of this larger whole, they don’t get to join or stay in the game.”
An excerpt from the Nonprofit Quarterly article.
“Many members of the nonprofit world have expressed concern that the sector has not developed new forms of governance. We have not, they complain, seen anything more than a minor variation on current designs and practices. For some time, I shared this perspective. But then I realized that this is not exactly true. We have created the “new nonprofit governance” at a new level within our communities. But we have not identified this shift because we’re so focused on the artifact that we know as “the board.”
“It used to be that boards and governance were substantially the same: the two concepts overlapped. But with time and a radically changing environment (e.g., changes in complexity, pace, scale, and nature of community problems and needs), the domain of “governance” has moved beyond the domain of “the board.” Though never stated in this way, governance and boards have greatly diverged in many of the settings where we address our most complex and demanding community needs. But in these complex environments, boards of individual organizations serve the functions of governance less and less well.
“In these environs, governance truly is leadership. And in this new generation of governance, which has most actively evolved in segments of the nonprofit sector where agencies strive to address these complex challenges, nonprofit boards are merely one element and no longer the primary “home” of the governance processes by which we address our most critical community issues.
“The scale of these complex problems has outgrown the capacity of our existing free¬standing organizations to respond—sometimes in terms of size, but especially, and more important, in terms of complexity and dynamism. Therefore, we’ve organized or developed our response at yet another level: the interorganizational alliance.
“In the new mode, the organization may well be the unit from which services are delivered, but such service delivery is designed, organized, resourced, and coordinated (in other words, governed) by the overarching network of relationships (among organizational leaders) that crosses and links all participating organizations and entities. Similar dynamics have emerged in some parts of the nonprofit policy and advocacy domain, where different organizations’ actions are orchestrated by a coordinated governance process that operates largely beyond the scope of any particular board, even as it deploys lobbying resources from various individual organizations.
“THE NEW NONPROFIT GOVERNANCE MODEL
“Governance is a function, and a board is a structure—and, as it turns out, a decreasingly central structure in the issue of new or alternative forms of governance. Don’t get me wrong; boards are still important in nonprofit governance. But, for many key community problems and issues, they’re not always appropriate as the unit of focus.
“Governance processes—processes of decision making concerning action based on and grounded in a shared sense of mission, vision, and purpose—include the functions of setting strategic direction and setting priorities; developing and allocating resources; adopting and applying rules of interunit engagement and relationships; and implementing an ongoing system of quality assurance that applies to all constituent organizations.
“In many key areas, these processes have moved above and beyond any individual nonprofit organization. If organizations do not work as an integral part of this larger whole, they don’t get to join or stay in the game.”
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Board Community Reach
Following up on yesterday’s post about boards, today’s post is about the community reach of individual board members, a very good quality to examine when recruiting, and the impact that can have on the board.
This article from Stanford Social Innovation Review examines that.
An excerpt.
“I am convinced that skill at fundraising and governance alone do not an excellent board member make. Nor do such skills alone ensure that a nonprofit organization maintains a durable, deep connection to the wider community it serves.
“A third skill—I call it civic reach—distinguishes a great board member from a merely adequate one, a world-class nonprofit from one that is simply functioning. Take a couple of examples: Back in 2005, Rochester Area Community Foundation’s (RACF) smart, highly engaged board had few well-known civic leaders. With the guidance of Jennifer Leonard, the foundation’s president and executive director, RACF aimed to become greater Rochester, N.Y.’s “catalyst for community change” and realized that movers and shakers could extend the institution’s influence. RACF added to its board the CEO of the city’s chamber of commerce, the CEO of a leading advertising company, the area’s school board president, a noted venture capitalist, a former United Way campaign chair, and the head of Rochester’s downtown development group. In just one of the positive outcomes, the chamber incorporated RACF’s recommendations into its annual state advocacy platform, resulting in $7.8 million in restored child care subsidies, plus crucial support for after-school funding.
“In another example, the board of directors of Make-A-Wish Foundation International, a nonprofit devoted to granting the wishes of children with life-threatening medical conditions, shifted its composition to achieve a worldwide leadership profile. Previously, the organization was governed by chapter affiliate representatives from various countries, a decidedly internal focus. The new board boasts a powerful cadre of business leaders with the prestige, power, and contacts to open doors worldwide. Two board members illustrate this new heft. Jim Fielding, president of Disney Stores Worldwide, connects Make-A-Wish to Europe, Asia, and North America, prime markets for both Disney merchandising and Make-A-Wish civic engagement. Tim Kilpin, general manager and senior vice president for Mattel Brands, provides Make-A-Wish with cash contributions from the company’s toy sales and facilitates business relationships through its worldwide network. Savvy, connected players like Fielding and Kilpin—people with profound civic reach—serve as global thinkers for charities while they tend to their own business interests. As a result of its new board, Nonprofits must have influential board members who connect them to the communities they serve Make-A-Wish more expertly navigates its corporate and individual relationships, ties its work to corporate social responsibility efforts, attracts a wider range of corporate sponsorship dollars, and manages its wish granting on a worldwide scale.
“POWER TO THE WEAKEST SECTOR
“Board members with civic reach compensate for the inherent limitations of the social sector, arguably democracy’s most critical, yet weakest, arena in terms of money and power. Social ventures generally lack the commercial sector’s profit-driven muscle and the public sector’s power to mandate by law and levy taxes to raise resources. Nonprofits need deep civic roots to thrive. To scale up operations, they need strong relationships with leaders in business, government agencies, and elective office. The sum of every board member’s civic reach is the soil in which those roots grow. Boards anemic in civic reach oversee organizations that are weak in civic relevance and resilience. Such organizations might have a range of funding sources and may run well operationally. But they rarely find themselves plugged into the civic power grid, where decisions about community and individual needs are largely made. Even with success, organizations deficient in civic reach often stand as capable orphans, unaccountably disconnected and alone, wondering why the recognition they think they deserve lies beyond their grasp.”
This article from Stanford Social Innovation Review examines that.
An excerpt.
“I am convinced that skill at fundraising and governance alone do not an excellent board member make. Nor do such skills alone ensure that a nonprofit organization maintains a durable, deep connection to the wider community it serves.
“A third skill—I call it civic reach—distinguishes a great board member from a merely adequate one, a world-class nonprofit from one that is simply functioning. Take a couple of examples: Back in 2005, Rochester Area Community Foundation’s (RACF) smart, highly engaged board had few well-known civic leaders. With the guidance of Jennifer Leonard, the foundation’s president and executive director, RACF aimed to become greater Rochester, N.Y.’s “catalyst for community change” and realized that movers and shakers could extend the institution’s influence. RACF added to its board the CEO of the city’s chamber of commerce, the CEO of a leading advertising company, the area’s school board president, a noted venture capitalist, a former United Way campaign chair, and the head of Rochester’s downtown development group. In just one of the positive outcomes, the chamber incorporated RACF’s recommendations into its annual state advocacy platform, resulting in $7.8 million in restored child care subsidies, plus crucial support for after-school funding.
“In another example, the board of directors of Make-A-Wish Foundation International, a nonprofit devoted to granting the wishes of children with life-threatening medical conditions, shifted its composition to achieve a worldwide leadership profile. Previously, the organization was governed by chapter affiliate representatives from various countries, a decidedly internal focus. The new board boasts a powerful cadre of business leaders with the prestige, power, and contacts to open doors worldwide. Two board members illustrate this new heft. Jim Fielding, president of Disney Stores Worldwide, connects Make-A-Wish to Europe, Asia, and North America, prime markets for both Disney merchandising and Make-A-Wish civic engagement. Tim Kilpin, general manager and senior vice president for Mattel Brands, provides Make-A-Wish with cash contributions from the company’s toy sales and facilitates business relationships through its worldwide network. Savvy, connected players like Fielding and Kilpin—people with profound civic reach—serve as global thinkers for charities while they tend to their own business interests. As a result of its new board, Nonprofits must have influential board members who connect them to the communities they serve Make-A-Wish more expertly navigates its corporate and individual relationships, ties its work to corporate social responsibility efforts, attracts a wider range of corporate sponsorship dollars, and manages its wish granting on a worldwide scale.
“POWER TO THE WEAKEST SECTOR
“Board members with civic reach compensate for the inherent limitations of the social sector, arguably democracy’s most critical, yet weakest, arena in terms of money and power. Social ventures generally lack the commercial sector’s profit-driven muscle and the public sector’s power to mandate by law and levy taxes to raise resources. Nonprofits need deep civic roots to thrive. To scale up operations, they need strong relationships with leaders in business, government agencies, and elective office. The sum of every board member’s civic reach is the soil in which those roots grow. Boards anemic in civic reach oversee organizations that are weak in civic relevance and resilience. Such organizations might have a range of funding sources and may run well operationally. But they rarely find themselves plugged into the civic power grid, where decisions about community and individual needs are largely made. Even with success, organizations deficient in civic reach often stand as capable orphans, unaccountably disconnected and alone, wondering why the recognition they think they deserve lies beyond their grasp.”
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
The Gates Family, American Philanthropists
Their philanthropy is extraordinary, as this article from Reuters reports.
An excerpt.
“(Reuters) - Bill Gates didn't lose his title as the world's richest man last year; he gave it away by plowing billions into his charitable foundation, experts say.
“Forbes will release its 2011 billionaires list on Wednesday and Gates, investor Warren Buffett and last year's richest man, Mexican tycoon Carlos Slim, will almost certainly be in the top three. The trio have topped the list for the past five years.
“But it would be no contest if Microsoft co-founder Gates had not already given away more than a third of his wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which focuses on global health and development and U.S. education.
"It wouldn't be a competition," said David Lincoln, director of global valuations at wealth research firm Wealth-X. "(Gates) would have a comfortable margin if he had never discovered philanthropy."
“Lincoln said Gates was currently worth about $49 billion, behind Slim, whose fortune he estimated at $60 billion. Buffett, also a philanthropist, is now worth some $47 billion.
“But had Gates not given away any money, he would be worth $88 billion, Lincoln said.
“Gates and his wife Melinda have so far given $28 billion to their foundation, the largest in the United States.”
An excerpt.
“(Reuters) - Bill Gates didn't lose his title as the world's richest man last year; he gave it away by plowing billions into his charitable foundation, experts say.
“Forbes will release its 2011 billionaires list on Wednesday and Gates, investor Warren Buffett and last year's richest man, Mexican tycoon Carlos Slim, will almost certainly be in the top three. The trio have topped the list for the past five years.
“But it would be no contest if Microsoft co-founder Gates had not already given away more than a third of his wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which focuses on global health and development and U.S. education.
"It wouldn't be a competition," said David Lincoln, director of global valuations at wealth research firm Wealth-X. "(Gates) would have a comfortable margin if he had never discovered philanthropy."
“Lincoln said Gates was currently worth about $49 billion, behind Slim, whose fortune he estimated at $60 billion. Buffett, also a philanthropist, is now worth some $47 billion.
“But had Gates not given away any money, he would be worth $88 billion, Lincoln said.
“Gates and his wife Melinda have so far given $28 billion to their foundation, the largest in the United States.”
Monday, March 7, 2011
Working with the Homeless
Thoreau is often claimed by those who are homeless by choice, as their patron saint, though his perspective is congruent with that of Saint-Exupery—who would never be claimed as a patron saint by the homeless.
Here is Thoreau on the poor.
“Be sure that you give the poor the aid they most need, though it be your example which leaves them far behind. If you give money, spend yourself with it, and do not merely abandon it to them. We make curious mistakes sometimes. Often the poor man is not so cold and hungry as he is dirty and ragged and gross. It is partly his taste, and not merely his misfortune. If you give him money, he will perhaps buy more rags with it. I was wont to pity the clumsy Irish laborers who cut ice on the pond, in such mean and ragged clothes, while I shivered in my more tidy and somewhat more fashionable garments, till, one bitter cold day, one who had slipped into the water came to my house to warm him, and I saw him strip off three pairs of pants and two pairs of stockings ere he got down to the skin, though they were dirty and ragged enough, it is true, and that he could afford to refuse the extra garments which I offered him, he had so many intra ones. This ducking was the very thing he needed. Then I began to pity myself, and I saw that it would be a greater charity to bestow on me a flannel shirt than a whole slop-shop on him. There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root, and it may be that he who bestows the largest amount of time and money on the needy is doing the most by his mode of life to produce that misery which he strives in vain to relieve.
(Thoreau, H. D. (1854). Walden. New York: Book-of-the-Month Club, (1996) pp. 97-98)
Here is Saint-Exupery.
“All too often have I seen pity led astray. But we who govern men have learnt to plumb their hearts, and we bestow compassion only on what is worthy of our concern. No pity waste I on the shrilly voiced afflictions that fret women’s hearts. As I withhold it from the dying and from the dead. And I know wherefore.
“A time there was, in my young days, when I pitied beggars and their sores. I hired physicians and procured balsams for them. Caravans from a far-off island brought me those rare unguents laced with gold that mend the torn skin above the flesh. Thus did I until the day when I discovered that beggars cling to their stench as to something rare and precious. For I had caught them scratching away their scabs and smearing their bodies with dung, like the husbandman who spreads manure over his garden plot, so as to wean from it the crimson flower. Vying with each other, they flaunted their corruption, and bragged of the alms they wrung from the tender-hearted. He who wheedled most likened himself to a high priest bringing forth from the shrine his goodliest idol for all to gape at and heap with offerings. When they deigned to consult my physicians, it was in the hope that the hugeness and virulence of their cankers would astound him. And how nimbly they shuffled their stumps to have room made for them in the market places! Thus they took the kindness done them for a homage, proffering their limbs to unctions that flattered their self-esteem.
“But no sooner were they healed than they found themselves of no account, like barren soil that feeds nothing; and they made haste to revive the ulcers that formerly had battened on their flesh. Then, clad once more in a motley of scabs and sores, they strutted it, begging-bowl in hand, and squatted beside the caravan road where, crying up their noisome gods, they levied tribute of the wayfarers.”
(Saint-Exupery, A. (1950). The Wisdom of the Sands. New York: Harcourt, Brace and company. pp. 3-4)
Here is Thoreau on the poor.
“Be sure that you give the poor the aid they most need, though it be your example which leaves them far behind. If you give money, spend yourself with it, and do not merely abandon it to them. We make curious mistakes sometimes. Often the poor man is not so cold and hungry as he is dirty and ragged and gross. It is partly his taste, and not merely his misfortune. If you give him money, he will perhaps buy more rags with it. I was wont to pity the clumsy Irish laborers who cut ice on the pond, in such mean and ragged clothes, while I shivered in my more tidy and somewhat more fashionable garments, till, one bitter cold day, one who had slipped into the water came to my house to warm him, and I saw him strip off three pairs of pants and two pairs of stockings ere he got down to the skin, though they were dirty and ragged enough, it is true, and that he could afford to refuse the extra garments which I offered him, he had so many intra ones. This ducking was the very thing he needed. Then I began to pity myself, and I saw that it would be a greater charity to bestow on me a flannel shirt than a whole slop-shop on him. There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root, and it may be that he who bestows the largest amount of time and money on the needy is doing the most by his mode of life to produce that misery which he strives in vain to relieve.
(Thoreau, H. D. (1854). Walden. New York: Book-of-the-Month Club, (1996) pp. 97-98)
Here is Saint-Exupery.
“All too often have I seen pity led astray. But we who govern men have learnt to plumb their hearts, and we bestow compassion only on what is worthy of our concern. No pity waste I on the shrilly voiced afflictions that fret women’s hearts. As I withhold it from the dying and from the dead. And I know wherefore.
“A time there was, in my young days, when I pitied beggars and their sores. I hired physicians and procured balsams for them. Caravans from a far-off island brought me those rare unguents laced with gold that mend the torn skin above the flesh. Thus did I until the day when I discovered that beggars cling to their stench as to something rare and precious. For I had caught them scratching away their scabs and smearing their bodies with dung, like the husbandman who spreads manure over his garden plot, so as to wean from it the crimson flower. Vying with each other, they flaunted their corruption, and bragged of the alms they wrung from the tender-hearted. He who wheedled most likened himself to a high priest bringing forth from the shrine his goodliest idol for all to gape at and heap with offerings. When they deigned to consult my physicians, it was in the hope that the hugeness and virulence of their cankers would astound him. And how nimbly they shuffled their stumps to have room made for them in the market places! Thus they took the kindness done them for a homage, proffering their limbs to unctions that flattered their self-esteem.
“But no sooner were they healed than they found themselves of no account, like barren soil that feeds nothing; and they made haste to revive the ulcers that formerly had battened on their flesh. Then, clad once more in a motley of scabs and sores, they strutted it, begging-bowl in hand, and squatted beside the caravan road where, crying up their noisome gods, they levied tribute of the wayfarers.”
(Saint-Exupery, A. (1950). The Wisdom of the Sands. New York: Harcourt, Brace and company. pp. 3-4)
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Generous People of Faith
More research, as reported by Belief Net, indicating what has been known for some tine, that people who attend church regularly are very generous, to their church and charity in general.
An excerpt.
“(RNS) Houses of worship and other charities often aren't in competition for dollars but instead tend to reap donations from similar donors, a new study shows.
“Slightly more than 50 percent of people who financially supported congregations also gave to at least one charitable organization in the last year, according to a study conducted by Phoenix-based Grey Matter Research Consulting.
“Researchers also found that the more Americans give to a house of worship, the more they donate to other groups. And the trend continues with the generosity of the donor.
“For example, donors who gave less than $100 to a house of worship also donated an average of $208 to other charities. Those who gave between $100 and $499 to a congregation gave an average of $376 to others. Donors of between $500 and $999 to places of worship gave an average of $916 to others.”
An excerpt.
“(RNS) Houses of worship and other charities often aren't in competition for dollars but instead tend to reap donations from similar donors, a new study shows.
“Slightly more than 50 percent of people who financially supported congregations also gave to at least one charitable organization in the last year, according to a study conducted by Phoenix-based Grey Matter Research Consulting.
“Researchers also found that the more Americans give to a house of worship, the more they donate to other groups. And the trend continues with the generosity of the donor.
“For example, donors who gave less than $100 to a house of worship also donated an average of $208 to other charities. Those who gave between $100 and $499 to a congregation gave an average of $376 to others. Donors of between $500 and $999 to places of worship gave an average of $916 to others.”
Generous People of Faith
More research, as reported by Belief Net, indicating what has been known for some tine, that people who attend church regularly are very generous, to their church and charity in general.
An excerpt.
“(RNS) Houses of worship and other charities often aren't in competition for dollars but instead tend to reap donations from similar donors, a new study shows.
“Slightly more than 50 percent of people who financially supported congregations also gave to at least one charitable organization in the last year, according to a study conducted by Phoenix-based Grey Matter Research Consulting.
“Researchers also found that the more Americans give to a house of worship, the more they donate to other groups. And the trend continues with the generosity of the donor.
“For example, donors who gave less than $100 to a house of worship also donated an average of $208 to other charities. Those who gave between $100 and $499 to a congregation gave an average of $376 to others. Donors of between $500 and $999 to places of worship gave an average of $916 to others.”
An excerpt.
“(RNS) Houses of worship and other charities often aren't in competition for dollars but instead tend to reap donations from similar donors, a new study shows.
“Slightly more than 50 percent of people who financially supported congregations also gave to at least one charitable organization in the last year, according to a study conducted by Phoenix-based Grey Matter Research Consulting.
“Researchers also found that the more Americans give to a house of worship, the more they donate to other groups. And the trend continues with the generosity of the donor.
“For example, donors who gave less than $100 to a house of worship also donated an average of $208 to other charities. Those who gave between $100 and $499 to a congregation gave an average of $376 to others. Donors of between $500 and $999 to places of worship gave an average of $916 to others.”
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Our America & Valentines Day in Iran
As Tocqueville noted almost 2 centuries ago:
“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools….Thus the most democratic country on earth is found to be, above all, the one where men in our day have most perfected the art of pursuing the object of their common desires in common and have applied this new science to the most objects. Does this result from an accident or could it be that there in fact exists a necessary relation between associations and equality?”
(Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 2000 translation by H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop. pp. 489-490)
With that as a backdrop, consider this article in the Wall Street Journal discussing Iran’s attempt to ban Valentines Day.
An excerpt.
“In another sign of its ever more improvisational approach to governance, the Iranian regime has outlawed Valentine's Day. "Symbols of hearts, half-hearts, red roses, and any activities promoting this day are banned," announced state media last month. "Authorities will take legal action against those who ignore the ban."
“Some 70% of Iran's population is said to be under the age of 30, so it seems natural that Valentine's Day has caught on in a country where the young keep trying to find non-state-mandated rituals to call their own. The state, for its part, continues to respond with a Whack-a-Mole approach to any social ripple not dreamt of in its philosophy.
“Theocratic regimes invariably suffer from the same besetting sin: As the world evolves, they must either revise their antiquated doctrines or try to hold the world rigidly in stasis. Iran's ruling mullahs keep choosing the latter option. And with mosque and state firmly conjoined, there's no stray detail of daily life so arcane that the scriptures can't be mobilized to rein it in.
“The Iranian state has pronounced against unauthorized mingling of the sexes, rap music, rock music, Western music, women playing in bands, too-bright nail polish, laughter in hospital corridors, ancient Persian rites-of-spring celebrations (Nowrooz), and even the mention of foreign food recipes in state media. This last may sound comically implausible, but it was officially announced by a state-run website on Feb. 6. So now the true nature of pasta as an instrument of Western subversion has been revealed.
“The regime's posture turns the smallest garden-variety gestures into thrilling acts of subversion. Slipping a Valentine card to a girlfriend takes on the significance of samizdat. Every firecracker set off during Nowrooz diminishes the police state's claims to omniscience. The mullahs have appointed themselves the enemy of fun; as a result, wherever fun herniates into view, it is a politicized irruption of defiance….
“In the end, Iran's rulers face an impossible task. Their genesis myth of a society based on a codified schema of sacred laws looks neither codified nor sacred. It convinces no one. Instead, the regime seems dedicated above all to stamping out joy wherever it may accidentally arise—a sour, paranoid struggle against irrepressible forces of nature, change, the seasons, music, romance and laughter. The Iranian people can take comfort: No earthly authority has won that particular contest for long.”
“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools….Thus the most democratic country on earth is found to be, above all, the one where men in our day have most perfected the art of pursuing the object of their common desires in common and have applied this new science to the most objects. Does this result from an accident or could it be that there in fact exists a necessary relation between associations and equality?”
(Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 2000 translation by H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop. pp. 489-490)
With that as a backdrop, consider this article in the Wall Street Journal discussing Iran’s attempt to ban Valentines Day.
An excerpt.
“In another sign of its ever more improvisational approach to governance, the Iranian regime has outlawed Valentine's Day. "Symbols of hearts, half-hearts, red roses, and any activities promoting this day are banned," announced state media last month. "Authorities will take legal action against those who ignore the ban."
“Some 70% of Iran's population is said to be under the age of 30, so it seems natural that Valentine's Day has caught on in a country where the young keep trying to find non-state-mandated rituals to call their own. The state, for its part, continues to respond with a Whack-a-Mole approach to any social ripple not dreamt of in its philosophy.
“Theocratic regimes invariably suffer from the same besetting sin: As the world evolves, they must either revise their antiquated doctrines or try to hold the world rigidly in stasis. Iran's ruling mullahs keep choosing the latter option. And with mosque and state firmly conjoined, there's no stray detail of daily life so arcane that the scriptures can't be mobilized to rein it in.
“The Iranian state has pronounced against unauthorized mingling of the sexes, rap music, rock music, Western music, women playing in bands, too-bright nail polish, laughter in hospital corridors, ancient Persian rites-of-spring celebrations (Nowrooz), and even the mention of foreign food recipes in state media. This last may sound comically implausible, but it was officially announced by a state-run website on Feb. 6. So now the true nature of pasta as an instrument of Western subversion has been revealed.
“The regime's posture turns the smallest garden-variety gestures into thrilling acts of subversion. Slipping a Valentine card to a girlfriend takes on the significance of samizdat. Every firecracker set off during Nowrooz diminishes the police state's claims to omniscience. The mullahs have appointed themselves the enemy of fun; as a result, wherever fun herniates into view, it is a politicized irruption of defiance….
“In the end, Iran's rulers face an impossible task. Their genesis myth of a society based on a codified schema of sacred laws looks neither codified nor sacred. It convinces no one. Instead, the regime seems dedicated above all to stamping out joy wherever it may accidentally arise—a sour, paranoid struggle against irrepressible forces of nature, change, the seasons, music, romance and laughter. The Iranian people can take comfort: No earthly authority has won that particular contest for long.”
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Microcredit Pioneer’s Troubles
One of the founding leaders of one of the most promising nonprofit innovations—microcredit—in years, is experiencing some difficulties, as reported by the New York Times.
An excerpt.
“DHAKA, Bangladesh — Any other year Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and a pioneer of microcredit, would be in Davos, Switzerland, this week. For years he has been celebrated at global gatherings like the World Economic Forum there for helping move millions of impoverished women toward a better life through tiny but transformational loans.
“Instead, he was in court again on Thursday, facing accusations, considered frivolous by most accounts, that one of his nonprofit companies adulterated vitamin-fortified yogurt. On Jan. 18, he was summoned to a rural courtroom to face charges of defamation lodged by a local politician.
“Microcredit, the idea that Mr. Yunus popularized as a path out of penury for those long excluded from the banking system, has increasingly come under scrutiny. Scholars have cast doubt on its effectiveness in fighting poverty, and politicians and other critics accuse microfinanciers, many of whom, unlike Mr. Yunus, profit from the loans, of getting rich off the poor.
“Now, the government of Bangladesh has ordered a wide-ranging inquiry into the microfinance institution he founded 34 years ago, Grameen Bank, after a Norwegian documentary accused him of mishandling donors’ money. Norway’s government has said no money was misused. Still, Mr. Yunus’s troubles will deepen what has become a global crisis in microfinance that threatens to undermine the very concept — small loans to poor people without collateral — on which his reputation rests.
“Long accustomed to adulation at home and abroad, suddenly, at 70, Mr. Yunus, Bangladesh’s best-known citizen, finds himself very much on the defensive. In an interview at his office here, Mr. Yunus seemed stunned and deeply stung.
“There is some kind of misinformation,” he said, his voice trailing off. “I shouldn’t say more.”
“A pause.
“Every word I say will be held against me,” he said finally.
“On one level, his troubles seem to be largely political. Mr. Yunus, who leads a spartan life, has for decades floated well above the muck of Bangladeshi politics. Then in 2007, while a caretaker government backed by the military ruled Bangladesh, he waded in, egged on by supporters who argued that his leadership was needed in a time of crisis.
“He declared in an interview that Bangladeshi politics were riddled with corruption. He floated a short-lived political party. Bangladesh’s political class did not take kindly to being lectured by the Nobel laureate. The steely leader of one of the main political parties, Sheikh Hasina Wazed, took umbrage, analysts say.”
An excerpt.
“DHAKA, Bangladesh — Any other year Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and a pioneer of microcredit, would be in Davos, Switzerland, this week. For years he has been celebrated at global gatherings like the World Economic Forum there for helping move millions of impoverished women toward a better life through tiny but transformational loans.
“Instead, he was in court again on Thursday, facing accusations, considered frivolous by most accounts, that one of his nonprofit companies adulterated vitamin-fortified yogurt. On Jan. 18, he was summoned to a rural courtroom to face charges of defamation lodged by a local politician.
“Microcredit, the idea that Mr. Yunus popularized as a path out of penury for those long excluded from the banking system, has increasingly come under scrutiny. Scholars have cast doubt on its effectiveness in fighting poverty, and politicians and other critics accuse microfinanciers, many of whom, unlike Mr. Yunus, profit from the loans, of getting rich off the poor.
“Now, the government of Bangladesh has ordered a wide-ranging inquiry into the microfinance institution he founded 34 years ago, Grameen Bank, after a Norwegian documentary accused him of mishandling donors’ money. Norway’s government has said no money was misused. Still, Mr. Yunus’s troubles will deepen what has become a global crisis in microfinance that threatens to undermine the very concept — small loans to poor people without collateral — on which his reputation rests.
“Long accustomed to adulation at home and abroad, suddenly, at 70, Mr. Yunus, Bangladesh’s best-known citizen, finds himself very much on the defensive. In an interview at his office here, Mr. Yunus seemed stunned and deeply stung.
“There is some kind of misinformation,” he said, his voice trailing off. “I shouldn’t say more.”
“A pause.
“Every word I say will be held against me,” he said finally.
“On one level, his troubles seem to be largely political. Mr. Yunus, who leads a spartan life, has for decades floated well above the muck of Bangladeshi politics. Then in 2007, while a caretaker government backed by the military ruled Bangladesh, he waded in, egged on by supporters who argued that his leadership was needed in a time of crisis.
“He declared in an interview that Bangladeshi politics were riddled with corruption. He floated a short-lived political party. Bangladesh’s political class did not take kindly to being lectured by the Nobel laureate. The steely leader of one of the main political parties, Sheikh Hasina Wazed, took umbrage, analysts say.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
