Connect With Us
YouTube
RSS

113 posts categorized "Grantmaking"

A Surprising Prize: Passion and Vision

November 17, 2016

3d-vision-passion-crossword-textThe Rathmann Challenge is helping to address the basic needs of two million kids across the country. Maybe someday soon the Challenge will assist in cooling the earth’s temperature.

Having constructed a hybrid granting vehicle that we hoped would provide all the upside of prize philanthropy while minimizing the downside (see Part I, "Small Dollars, Big Ideas"), all we needed now was to figure out the problem we wanted to address with our first Rathmann Challenge. We knew our founders had their passions with respect to philanthropic objectives, so we turned to the foundation’s grant history over the last twenty-five years for guidance. There were grants to the arts, to healthcare, to dog parks, to…well, everything imaginable. Fortunately, there was one piece of data that stood out; approximately 50 percent of our total funding was directed, in one manner or another, to education. Coupled with the involvement in that field by a number of foundation members, we had the subject of our first Challenge.

Education. Perfect…except, not so much. What problem could we possibly solve related to education that the likes of the Gates and Annenberg foundations had not already addressed — and, with four log orders more money!

The only way to find out was to pick up the phone and start calling every person we knew in the field. Soon, anecdotes were streaming in from all over, and they led us to two words: Basic Needs. Stories about kids missing classes because they had no way to get to school, being too distracted to learn because they hadn't eaten a solid meal or hadn't had a safe place to sleep for days, or feeling ashamed because they lacked the resources to buy a pencil and notebook, let alone a backpack. The more we listened, the more we learned about the endless number of missing essentials interfering with kids' ability to be ready for learning. Someone, somewhere, had to have come up with a solution to at least one of these problems.

In order to cast the net as widely as possible, we framed our 2015 Challenge as "Provisions for Personal Necessities in Preparation for Learning" and listed all the possible areas brought to our attention, from health and welfare to food and shelter. When the Challenge opened its application period, the proposed solutions poured in. And they were as inspirational as they were diverse, from a massive warehouse of donated school supplies in Florida to a new school dining experience that addressed food deserts in the heart of San Francisco. The site visits to the finalists, three of whom received Honorable Mention awards, left us in awe: Hope House, a national program aimed at helping maintain a connection between incarcerated parents and their children; HEAL, a program in New Orleans that treats the whole child through physical and emotional health support delivered within the school system; and Thread, a Baltimore program designed to create an alternative family support system for at-risk kids.

The Recipient of the 2015 Rathmann Challenge was Vision to Learn, a California-based nonprofit that provides mobile eye examinations and free glasses. As the founder said, "It's hard to learn when you can't see the blackboard." We met an optometry technician who described one little girl whose vision was so impaired she needed to use the white lines painted on the parking lot to find her way to and from the mobile clinic. We watched one little boy clutch his cherished (and broken) pair of glasses he'd received years earlier. He'd taped them together and around the back of his head each day so they would stay in place. When Vision to Learn applied to the Challenge, they were in two states and had provided glasses to approximately twenty-three thousand kids. Could their mobile clinic scale enough to address the two million kids across the country in desperate need of glasses? With the Even Bigger Idea® opportunity in their sights, Vision to Learn unveiled an ambitious national roll-out in ten new states with the potential to impact the lives of tens of thousands of children. And staff there was quick to credit the EBI for inspiring them to consider ways to solve the problem of youth vision health across the country.

Key components to Vision to Learn's plan included successfully identifying reimbursement dollars in the Affordable Care Act and elsewhere for exactly this type of care (a possible government adoption "endgame'). It also planned to extend its proven partnering capability to local businesses and professional sports teams with vested interests in the health and welfare of local kids. And, lastly, it would continue to document the meaningful benefits and outcomes associated with vision health during early childhood.

In October 2016, Vision to Learn was awarded the inaugural Even Bigger Idea® grant in support of its work. We are thrilled the Rathmann Challenge led us to Vision to Learn, and even more thrilled we are now part of its efforts to help solve the problem of childhood vision health and its destructive impact on educational welfare across the country.

In addition to the wonderful relationship the Rathmann Family Foundation has with Vision to Learn, the Challenge also led us to relationships with many applicants who have now received funding in support of their efforts to address other basic needs.  The Challenge had many "winners" but perhaps the biggest was the proof of principle that small dollars can have an outsized impact.

So, could this powerful grantmaking tool be used to help solve a completely different type of problem?

The 2017 Rathmann Challenge will give us the opportunity to find out. For years, the Rathmann Family Foundation has been funding studies related to agricultural land management and the impact of compost on those lands. Many land managers use compost to improve soil productivity, increase water retention, and reduce sensitivity to drought while effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions from materials otherwise left to decay in the waste stream. Research also has shown that an application of compost to agricultural lands increases carbon sequestration in soil where that carbon might otherwise be lost to the air or water. If the Rathmann Challenge could be used to help promote the widespread use of compost, it would help facilitate the adoption of an important tool for recapturing carbon from the atmosphere, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions and stabilizing the carbon cycle — all of which would aid in the massive effort needed to cool the earth's temperature.

Our hope is that through the 2017 Rathmann Challenge we will be able to award $300,000 to an organization that can significantly expand the use of compost in the United States and, as before, leverage small dollars for an Even Bigger Idea® that could make a difference for many. The application period for the 2017 Challenge opens on February 15, 2017. Won't you help us spread the word?

For more information on the 2017 Rathmann Challenge, click here.

Rick Rathmann has served on the board of directors of the Rathmann Family Foundation for the past twenty-five years and as executive director since 2002. During that time, Rathmann has engaged in seed and early-stage funding of a number of life science companies and has served in governance and advisory roles at numerous biotechnology start-ups.  Prior to his philanthropic and venture capital work, Rathmann served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California (Los Angeles). 

The Next Four Years: Keep Moving Forward

November 16, 2016

Keep-moving-forwardA week ago, the country was in a totally different place than it is today. Regardless of your personal politics, there's no denying we are entering uncertain times. Like everyone else, grantmakers are looking around, trying to figure out how we got here, and making their best guesses about the lay of the land in the months to come. Here are seven things that you might want to consider as you think about the next four years:

1. Don't beat yourself up. The election outcome made it clear that many of us in philanthropy have overlooked the sentiments of a silent but seething portion of the population. While it's great to reflect and think about what your blinders may have been in the past, we all need to learn from what happened and move on. We have important work to do.

2. Don't gut your strengths. Just because the world has changed doesn't mean your work has been misguided. For example, as a field we have made great strides in racial equity and inclusion, and we simply can't drop that focus now. We must recognize that, just as with the stock market, we shouldn't allow short-term reactions to affect our long-term goals. If your early childhood strategy was working last week, it will work next week, and next month, and next year (albeit with a few tweaks and adjustments).

3. Take time to learn, but not too much. When seismic shifts occur, foundations have a tendency to hunker down and look for the underlying causes of those shifts in an effort to avoid similar events in the future. But avoiding change is impossible, and trying to cocoon oneself in a safety net of knowledge is akin to remaining in the bomb shelter after the air raid has ended. If you want to avoid being left behind by change, it's imperative that you learn in real time.

4. Develop systems for ongoing learning and rapid course correction. It's likely that the rapid pace of change we all have experienced will only accelerate. You need to have a plan in place now to keep track of new developments. Identify your go-to resources and start communicating your expectations for how and what staff needs to learn and share. Examine the decision-making processes within your foundation and figure out how you can make them more nimble and responsive to change without losing the focus on your overall mission.

5. Model inclusiveness. There has been, and no doubt will continue to be, a great deal of talk about stereotypes of people of color, immigrants, Muslims, "cosmopolitan elites" (whatever that means), and others. But we all know that creating new boxes with jargon-y labels and stuffing people into them isn't very helpful. Instead, we must remember that a focus on equity includes everyone, from an inner-city single mom of color in New York City, to a working class white male in rural Nebraska, to a Ph.D. policy wonk in San Francisco. No matter what our grantmaking focus, it is up to us to bring people together to address it. As a client recently reminded me, when we talk about the impact of the election, we should consider it through the various lenses and perspectives that are now in play.

6. Get off the bench. If you haven't supported policy advocacy, community organizing, or civic engagement work in the past, now may be the time to think about making an investment. And if you have supported this kind of work in the past, consider redoubling your commitment. We live in a democracy where the voices of those in need are encouraged and heard, and we should take advantage of that fact. The Funders Committee for Civic Participation and Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement are good places to start.

7. Demonstrate the power of philanthropy. The day after the election, Henry Berman, the CEO of Exponent Philanthropy, wrote in the Chronicle of Philanthropy, "Starting now, foundations and donors of all types should be speaking up and talking about the ways our communities benefit from grant makers of all sizes and types." He's right. Thanks to the media scrutiny of the Trump and Clinton foundations, philanthropy got a bad rap during the campaign. We need to speak up – honestly, openly, meaningfully, and loudly, if need be – about all the good philanthropy does and the fact that we will continue to work to bring about positive change.

Headshot_KPWGlobal philanthropy advisor Kris Putnam-Walkerly recently was named one of "America's Top 25 Philanthropy Speakers." This post originally appeared in Kris's Confident Giving Newsletter and is reposted here with permission. ©2016 Kris Putnam-Walkerly, Putnam Consulting Group, putnam-consulting.com.

A Surprising Prize: Small Dollars, Big Ideas

November 14, 2016

BigIdeasThe Rathmann Challenge is helping to address the basic needs of two million kids across the country. Maybe someday soon the Challenge will assist in cooling the earth’s temperature.

My family has been fortunate in the for-profit world to experience firsthand how a relatively small amount of money, if applied well (and with some luck), can launch a big idea. Would the same hold true for the nonprofit world? The Rathmann Challenge is a grantmaking tool devised for that purpose — finding good ideas that might scale to create value for many.

As with other family foundations, our founders were gracious, kind, and…a powerful influence. After their departure, we needed new options for going forward that would honor their creativity, entrepreneurial ethos, and innovative spirit. At its core, the Rathmann Challenge is like any other prize philanthropy program — with all the pluses and minuses. It garners attention by highlighting an issue of the day and then making an award ($100k in this case) to one winner ("the Challenge Recipient"). This is great news for the Challenge Recipient, of course, but not so great news for all the others who spent time working on their applications and received nothing. Perhaps even worse, all the great attention the prize brings to an important problem fades quickly after the excitement of the initial award. We wondered whether the model could be tweaked. Was there a way to make the Challenge a little less "winner take all" and a little more "applicant beneficial?" The simplest and most direct method would be to pay a small stipend to each applicant for applying, but the likely effect on the quality of our applicant pool was concerning. We needed instead to devise a process that, by its very nature, would create value for each applicant willing to put the resources into applying.

Three principles guided our efforts. First, the difficulty of each step of the process had to mirror the likelihood of success for the applicant at that stage. Second, the application itself needed to serve as a tool to help organizations promote existing internal practices that addressed the interests of funding organizations like ours (e.g., the ability to think critically and provide an honest self-assessment about past successes and failures). And, third, the criteria for a winning application needed to prompt each organization to spend time considering ways to scale their impact in the future (and thereby motivate and inspire strategic planning irrespective of the organization’s success in the Challenge).

As our applicant pool was winnowed, the rigor increased, but always with an eye toward creating value for the applicant. We added a discussion piece from a Stanford Social Innovation Review article challenging our finalists to figure out their "endgame" — that is, their definition of total success. Types of endgames included the creation of an open source platform, a replication model akin to franchising, the completion of the organization's objectives and a wind down, or an adoption model where the mission is undertaken or subsumed by a government entity. Applicants told us the article provided a helpful counterpoint to a world where simply staying alive from year to year can be so challenging that it becomes an organization's primary objective.

Lastly, we included a peer review phase during which the finalists were asked to read each other’s submissions and then provide a constructive critique. In recognition of the increased time commitment, and to ensure that finalists were sufficiently incentivized to fully engage, we guaranteed monetary awards for at least two Honorable Mentions ($5,000 each), in addition to the Recipient award.

The results were transformative. Despite ostensibly little crossover with respect to organizational objectives, the peer reviews were diligent and insightful and the finalists (both successful and unsuccessful alike) commended the process for what it produced in constructive critiques and novel ideas for implementing future organizational objectives.

The flipside of the desire to revamp the application process was the "one and done" problem with the prize itself. We had to wonder why we would want this whole contest to end with a $100,000 payment when, in some respects, the great work aimed at solving a difficult problem was just beginning. Didn't we get into this so we could be a part of an important solution? Even better, maybe our foundation's years of experience could help the Challenge Recipient devise a plan for expanding its reach that its staff had not even anticipated.

We called this enhancement to the standard prize format, the "Even Bigger Idea®," or EBI, and designed it so the Challenge Recipient could earn an additional $200,000 over the following two years. As one might suspect, the name was a bit tongue-in-cheek, alluding, as it does, to all those claiming to have found the next big idea. But we felt the Even Bigger Idea® also described the relationship we wanted to have with the Challenge Recipient as we applied our collective experience to address a specific problem. Most importantly, we wanted the EBI to represent the recognition that the Recipient already had a successful record of implementing big ideas that had now earned it the opportunity to dream a little bigger and (hopefully) extend its impact.

With the vehicle now in place, all we needed was an idea. But where does one look for an idea that could help make a positive difference in the lives of many? Following our passion (as described in part two of this series) seemed like a good a place to start.

Rick Rathmann has served on the board of directors of the Rathmann Family Foundation for the past twenty-five years and as executive director since 2002. During that time, Rathmann has engaged in seed and early-stage funding of a number of life science companies and has served in governance and advisory roles at numerous biotechnology start-ups.  Prior to his philanthropic and venture capital work, Rathmann served as an assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California (Los Angeles).

Philanthropy Isn't the Answer to Bad Government

November 02, 2016

Decline_loss_downDeclining state revenue in the face of growing needs in education, health, child welfare, and infrastructure is leading many to look to philanthropy to fill these gaps. As the Houston Chronicle editorial board recently noted in urging the Houston Independent School District to accept $7.5 million from the Kinder Foundation, "philanthropic gifts are needed in an environment where the state legislature is abdicating its constitutional responsibility."

As presidents of two of the largest Houston-based philanthropies, that statement sounded an alarm for us because philanthropy cannot, and should not, replace government spending on public goods and services. According to The Giving Institute, U.S. philanthropy hit a record-setting peak in 2015, when donations reached $373.3 billion. The federal budget for 2016 is $3.95 trillion.

Simply put, philanthropy is a relative drop in the bucket. There is no conceivable way to make up for inadequate public spending through philanthropy.

Locally, HISD is facing a $162 million loss in revenue due to the state's public education funding system, and we are spending $70 million in Harris County property tax revenue due to the state's refusal to accept federal funds to insure low-income citizens.

Our foundations' missions are broader in geography and scope. But even if we focused all our efforts on these two government-generated shortfalls, the amount needed is more than twice our combined annual budgets. Sound public policy, not philanthropy, is the solution to these problems.

Continue reading »

How the Lack of Market Feedback Puts Foundations at Risk and What Some Funders Are Doing About It

October 06, 2016

FeedbackQuick: What's the difference between a private foundation and a public charity? To answer, you could consult the Internal Revenue Code, or you might just as easily say: "One has money and the other needs it."

This simple truth carries profound consequences for foundation decision-making and culture, through the impact of market feedback — or the lack thereof. A private foundation (generally an independent, endowed grantmaking entity) has a fundamentally different and weaker market feedback loop than either a for-profit business or a public charity (generally an operating nonprofit). Even the smallest business receives regular feedback from its market in the form of changes in sales. In order to maintain its tax status, a public charity must constantly attract public resources to put toward its mission — and the response to these efforts is a very real, ongoing, and often painful example of market feedback. A nonprofit unable to attract sufficient funds faces an existential crisis. Negative market feedback in the form of inadequate resources presents the organization with an imperative: either change in ways that will attract the necessary resources, or risk economic failure.

In a striking contrast, no such feedback loop exists for a private foundation. Because its resources were provided by a donor in an endowment at the outset of its existence, there is never a question of economic failure. Put more simply: to survive, a private foundation need not operate successful programs or make effective grants; it need not manage its staff well, engage its board in generative thinking, or meaningfully participate in larger conversations about its work. So long as it achieves the low bar set by the law (meeting payout requirements, paying excise tax, etc.), it has nothing to fear. The only external measure of its success is whether it remains in good standing with the IRS and the state in which it is incorporated. Beyond that, accountability begins and ends with itself.

This unique situation is a source of jealousy, impatience, and frustration among nonprofit leaders, who find it hard to imagine a world not dominated by their continuous need to fundraise. For the foundation, however, this insularity removes one of the most valuable inputs for any organization: frequent, timely, and accurate market feedback.

Continue reading »

Advancing Women's Economic Security

October 03, 2016

WFN_DSP_discoverIn Tennessee, the Women's Foundation for a Greater Memphis is working to reduce poverty by 5 percent over five years in a zip code, 38126, where 62 percent of adults and 76 percent of children live at or below the poverty line.

In Chicago, 460,000 workers now have paid sick leave thanks to the work of the Chicago Foundation for Women and a coalition of community, faith-based, women's advocacy, and labor organizations.

In Massachusetts, the Women's Fund of Southeastern Massachusetts piloted a support program that helped Jamielee, a mother of two young children, get a car — and on the path to a college degree and employment, along with 76 percent of the program's participants.

These are just a few of the things that women's foundations across the United States are doing to advance women's economic security.

In September, the Women's Funding Network unveiled a new Economic Security Digital Storytelling Platform to highlight the important work our members are doing for women and girls around the world. The site allows visitors to explore economic security data and grantmaking strategies, as well as powerful stories of the women, programs, and organizations that are driving and creating positive change for women.

Continue reading »

Most Popular PhilanTopic Posts (September 2016)

October 01, 2016

As we enter the homestretch of another year that has flown by, we have good news and bad news. First the bad: There are still thirty-seven days left in this election cycle. On the good-news front, you all dug into the PhilanTopic archive and surfaced a couple of wonderful items from the past, including a terrific post by Small Change author Michael Edwards (one of three in an excellent series Michael wrote for us) and a sharp review of Fareed Zakaria's In Defense of a Liberal Education by Michael Weston-Murphy. You also liked Stephen Pratt's sensible advice vis-à-vis metrics and measurement, Kris Putnam-Walkerly's exhortation to grantmakers, and Matt's Q&A with Markle Foundation president Zoë Baird. As for that pesky thing called time, I like (but don't always follow) the great Satchel Paige's advice: Don't look back. Something might be gaining on you....

What did you read/watch/listen to in September that made you pause, made you think, made you hopeful? Feel free to share with our readers in the comments section below. Or drop us a line at mfn@foundationcenter.org.

Weekend Link Roundup (September 17-18 2016)

September 18, 2016

Our weekly round up of noteworthy items from and about the social sector. For more links to great content, follow us on Twitter at @pndblog....

End-of-summerCommunications/Marketing

Did the board of the Wounded Warrior Project blunder by firing CEO Steve Nardizzi and COO Al Giardano in response to allegations in the media that the organization was spending too much on itself and too little on those it was supposed to help? Forbes contributor Richard Levick reports.

Education

On openDemocracy's Transformations blog, Megan Tompkins-Stange, assistant professor of public policy at the Gerald R. Ford School, University of Michigan and author of the recently published Policy Patrons: Philanthropy, Education Reform and the Politics of Influence, argues that billionaire philanthropists are imposing their views on the rest of society with little or no accountability for their actions.

Giving Pledge

Dean and Marianne Metropoulos of Greenwich, Connecticut, are the newest members of the Giving Pledge club.

Grantmaking

Guest blogging on the Center for Effective Philanthropy blog, Jessica Bearman, principal of Bearman Consulting and a consultant to the Grants Managers Network, suggests that foundations intentionally moving to integrate operations and program have five essential characteristics in common.

Grantseeking

On the GuideStar blog, Martin Teitel, author of The Ultimate Insider’s Guide to Winning Foundation Grants and a former CEO of the Cedar Tree Foundation, shares his six-step formula for winning a grant.

Continue reading »

You Can Connect the Dots for Global Philanthropy

September 16, 2016

ConnectthedotsData is something we all want. Data, though, is not something we can all have... not right now, at least. In order for data to be collected, processed, analyzed, and shared — all while taking into account individual country contexts around the world — the data has to exist in the first place. This may seem obvious, but it is often overlooked, especially in a global context. For example, we simply don't know what kind of impact foundations in Kenya are having in a sector like health, or what funds they are directing to various issues and how that compares to the impact and spending by government programs or international aid. As a result, we have no way of knowing whether philanthropy is making a difference or if there's a way those dollars could be used more effectively. That's the case not just in Kenya, but in countries across the global North and South. And the reason we don't have a complete picture of the philanthropic sector's contribution to and role within the development ecosystem is because there is a lack of data skills and a data culture in philanthropy. Not just a small gap; it's a pretty big one.

In order to tackle these issues, Foundation Center has developed a program to partner with philanthropic infrastructure organizations around the world to create a culture of data, build much-needed data management capacity, and create and use data to drive more effective development and grantmaking outcomes. The program also aims to strengthen the efforts of local foundations and associations of foundations to develop their own long-term, sustainable, in-country data strategies, better understand and fill their capacity needs through skills development, and highlight and provide tools to help foundations work with data more effectively.

Continue reading »

Mind the Gap! Bridging Funder and Grantee Approaches to Measurement

September 14, 2016

Methods of measurementsOver the past thirty years, the total value of philanthropic assets in the United States has more than doubled, while the poverty rate has remained unchanged and income inequality has grown.

There are lots of reasons for this lack of progress, but facts like that make it hard to argue that foundations and nonprofits are successfully pursuing an anti-poverty mission.

At Root Cause, we believe a big reason nonprofits and foundations struggle to create the change we all seek is their failure to articulate the hypotheses underlying their approach to change, to use data to test those hypotheses, and to use the results of those tests to refine those approaches and build a body of evidence about what works.

For the past year, I've been making the rounds at regional and national conferences to talk about why measurement and evaluation matter. I've also had the chance to sit down with dozens of nonprofit and foundation leaders for extended conversations about what's at stake here.

The good news is that many foundation and nonprofit leaders share our point of view and have a real sense of urgency about using data and evidence to improve nonprofit practice and achieve better results.

The bad news is that everyone seems to be on a different page. Even among those pursuing a performance-measurement agenda, there is little in the way of dialogue, transparency, or knowledge sharing. Nonprofits develop theories of change in isolation, as if meaningful change happens through a single intervention here or a single intervention there, while funders articulate their own theories of change without much regard for what their grantees are doing.

The result: a boatload of metrics gets collected but neither funder nor grantee gains much insight into what works or how their efforts can be leveraged to drive real, systemic change.

What to do? We'd like to suggest the following:

Continue reading »

Get Out There!

September 08, 2016

Go_signI hope you had a great summer. Vacations, plenty of pool time, a little rest and relaxation — and lots of playing outside. Now it's time to hunker down in the office and get things done, right?

Wrong.

In my opinion, one of the last places a grantmaker should be is in the office. As foundation staff and trustees, we want to see community problems being solved. There's no way to create those solutions without getting out there and forging connections. And there are few people more suited to forging connections than those of us who work in the philanthropic world.

Building connections isn't something you do behind a desk. You need to get out into the community. You need to learn about problems by observing and discussing them firsthand with those who are most affected by them. You need to meet people on their own turf and look them in the eye before you can truly understand the assets they can bring to bear on a problem. And you need to listen, listen, listen to the conversations that almost never take place within your own foundation's walls.

Of course, not every foundation operates this way. It's not that foundation people are shy or too self-important to get out there – it's that they get caught up in the myth of the importance of being in the office.

Continue reading »

Most Popular PhilanTopic Posts (July 2016)

August 06, 2016

Sort of like that great little farm stand that pulls you in every time you drive by, our roundup of the most popular posts here on PhilanTopic in July offers lots of delicious food for thought. So pour yourself a tall glass of iced tea or lemonade and dig in!

What did you read/watch/listen to in June that got your juices flowing? Feel free to share with our readers in the comments section below. Or drop us a line at mfn@foundationcenter.org.

5 Questions for…June Wilson, Executive Director, Quixote Foundation

July 11, 2016

Named for Cervantes’ fictional knight errant, the Quixote Foundation was established in 1997 by Stuart Hanisch, a civil rights activist and documentary filmmaker who poured his family’s wealth into social causes. With a mission "to see free people in fair societies on a healthy planet," the Seattle-based foundation has been focused on progressive causes in the areas of the environment, reproductive rights, civil and human rights, and media reform.

In 2010, Quixote announced it would spend down — or, as the foundation puts it, "spend up" — its endowment by 2017. (As of year-end 2014, its assets totaled approximately $12 million.) Grants awarded in recent years have supported the Media Democracy Fund’s campaign to ensure net neutrality and the National Wildlife Federation’s diversity, inclusion, and leadership development efforts. MDF founding director Helen Brunner was awarded the Council on Foundations' 2016 Robert Scrivner Award for Creative Grantmaking for her work with the foundation, while NWF recently recognized it for its guidance and support with the National Conservation Organization Award.

PND spoke with June Wilson, who joined the foundation as executive director and board member in 2013, about diversity in environmental organizations and across the nonprofit sector and the foundation's "spend-up" process.

Headshot_june_wilsonPhilanthropy News Digest: A 2014 study by Dorceta E. Taylor, a University of Michigan professor of environmental justice studies, found that minorities and people of color are underrepresented on the staffs of environmental organizations. Since then, fellowship programs and other efforts have been launched to address the gap. What is behind the lack of diversity in the field, and why is it imperative for the field to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)?

June Wilson: The report lays out some of the issues behind the lack of diversity in the field very well, such as the lack of cross-race and -class collaboration, as well as employment/recruitment practices. And I think looking at DEI in the environmental movement is imperative because those who are most likely to be negatively impacted by climate change are communities of color and poor communities. Hurricane Katrina is one of the most obvious examples: Katrina affected the entire city of New Orleans, but the communities that suffered the worst impacts, those whose residents couldn’t come back because they lacked the resources, those whose homes and neighborhoods were destroyed, were mostly black communities.

We put so much effort and resources into conservation policies and encouraging people to access the outdoors and the natural environment, and those benefits are meant to be shared by all, so engaging communities of color in the environmental movement is imperative.

PND: Quixote has invested in the National Wildlife Federation's commitment to improving DEI in its internal and external practices through training and leadership development. Can you describe the foundation’s work with NWF — what opportunities did you see in the chance to work with the federation, and what are some of the successful outcomes of that work?

JW: NWF is one of the few grantees we've worked with on a consistent basis since the foundation was created. We talked about our commitment to DEI efforts with NWF’s [then-director of individual philanthropy] Chris Harvey, who connected us with [then-vice president for affiliate and regional strategies] Dan Chu, who was looking at how to develop a leadership program that really could affect the leadership pipeline, increase diversity, and educate staff internally about issues around structural racism, equity, and inclusion. So it just felt like a win-win: there was someone at NWF saying, "This is important for this organization," and we were saying, "We want to champion this." In 2010, we funded the Leader to Leader program for NWF staff with a three-year grant, and Dan felt it was important to frontload the grant to maximize its impact in terms of increasing understanding within the organization's leadership.

Our investment was pretty significant, and we could see how the program and related trainings and workshops were beginning to have some impact at the individual level. But at the end of the grant period, in 2013, we hadn’t seen a lot of change at the organizational level in terms of executive-level leadership transitions and capacity. So, even though we didn't give them an additional grant, for the last two and a half years we've been in conversation with the team there about their work around DEI and continued commitment to ensuring that it is sustained. [Associate director for the Pacific] Les Welsh, who was part of the Leader to Leader program and is truly committed to that work, brought board members and Collin O'Mara, NWF's new president and CEO, into the conversation, and it's been remarkable to see how constant engagement and investment in our relationship with the grantee beyond the grant is enabling the long-term impact we seek, including the implementation of new policies to diversify the organization’s leadership pyramid and a lot of interest on the part of key members of the board.

Continue reading »

Weekend Link Roundup (July 9-10, 2016)

July 10, 2016

Stop_violenceOur weekly round up of noteworthy items from and about the social sector. For more links to great content, follow us on Twitter at @pndblog....

Community Development

Alexia Fernandez Campbell, a staff writer at The Atlantic, looks at what one Rust Belt city is doing to keep blue-collar African-Americans from being displaced as it tries to attract immigrants and boost the local economy.

Environment

Thanks to global regulation of chlorine compounds, the ozone hole over the Antarctic is on the mend. Alexandra Witze reports for Nature magazine.

On a less upbeat note, the International Development Association of the World Bank Group reports that unchecked climate change could push 100 million people back into poverty by 2030,with the poorest regions of the world — sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia — likely to be hardest hit.

Giving

For weeks, writes David A. Fahrenthold, the Washington Post has been trying — and failing — to find evidence that presumptive Republican Party presidential nominee Donald Trump is as charitable as he claims to be.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) has introduced legislation that would prohibit foundations with ties to former public officials, as well as presidents and vice presidents, from accepting contributions from individuals connected to foreign governments. The Hill's Alan K. Ota reports

On Glasspockets' Transparency Talk blog, our colleague Melissa Moy takes a closer look at the philanthropy of recent Giving Pledge signatories Marc and Lynne Benioff.

Continue reading »

8 Tools Grantmakers Frequently Forget to Use

July 07, 2016

Photodune-9895775-toolbox-mWhen most people think about philanthropy, they usually think about money. But cold, hard cash is just one tool in the grantmaker's tool box. And some of those non-cash tools are far more effective when it comes to addressing grantee needs and community challenges. Here are eight tools grantmakers can — and should — use more often:

1. Connections. Who are the people you know, and how can you introduce or refer your grantees to them? If you're like most people, you probably have a broader list of contacts than you realize. Don't be afraid to use it. Think about the other funders, accountants, attorneys, consultants, government employees, and nonprofit leaders you've met. How could these people help your grantees or partners? Once you get started, you'll be amazed at the connections you can make.

2. Knowledge and intellectual capital. What do you know about your community, about local politics, about other funders, about the issues? How and when can you share that information in ways that can support your grantees? For example, the Community Foundation of Lorain County recently used its knowledge of the area and of board leadership to conduct a series of board trainings for board members and CEOs from nonprofits across the county. And the Cleveland Foundation, after learning a great deal about quality afterschool programs, created an online database of high-quality afterschool programs to help parents find programs for their kids.

3. Experience. Chances are, you have specific experience in certain areas that can translate to advice and guidance for grantees. Perhaps earlier in your career you led a scale-up of a nonprofit enabling it to reach new markets. Maybe you led an advocacy campaign aimed at changing public policy. Perhaps your organization merged with another organization. When you started your job as a funder, you didn't wipe the slate clean — you brought your past experience with you, and you can use it now to help your grantees. Just be sure to offer your advice with humility, and only when a grantee is in a mood to listen. No one wants to be forced to learn from your experience against his or her will!

Continue reading »

Contributors

Quote of the Week

  • "The wise man does not lay up his own treasures. The more he gives to others, the more he has for his own...."

    — Lao Tzu (605-531 BCE)

Subscribe to Philantopic

Contributors

Guest Contributors

  • Laura Cronin
  • Derrick Feldmann
  • Thaler Pekar
  • Kathryn Pyle
  • Nick Scott
  • Allison Shirk

Tweets from @PNDBLOG

Follow us »

Tags

Other Blogs