Funders, Mutual benefits, and Tax incentives

Budget Plan Brings Big Changes to Tax Incentives for Donors

            The tax plans that Obama aims to implement sound like a good plan to me. The fact that the change effects the top tax bracket population seems to be the main issue from the perspective of the Chronicle of Philanthropy.  However, the increase in taxation seems pretty minor, I realize that these people are savvy with their money and the majority of them would likely complain of such changes, but I believe it is a necessary change.  Whether it will dramatically affect the philanthropy of this group is somewhat debatable though.  At this point of change, I don’t see it doing much in the nonprofit sector.  With more change (in this case tax increase), it is more likely that this group will be less philanthropic.  But, what I am struggling with in this reasoning is the assumption that this group cares less about their charity donations than other costly habits.  It is plausible to me that their philanthropic giving may not change much with increases in taxation.  Maybe I am naïve.  I wonder where we could find some information on this, do you think that there have been studies that correlate the increases in taxation on the top tax bracket with their charitable giving?

Donors and Nonprofits Face a Defining Moment in Responding to a Crisis

            This article discussed the need for nonprofits to engage in activities that promote jobs, including: retraining classes and workshops, hiring those who may have a harder time finding employment in the traditional market, and ultimately preparing these people for the traditional job market. I think Scott Stannard-Stockton makes a good point about the role of nonprofits in stimulating the job market. The private sector really strengthens the basic skill sets that are needed for employment, and provide individuals with second chances. 

A Newly Powerful Grant-Making Force: Artist-Endowed Foundations

            The artist-endowed foundations are not only growing (over the last 15 years), but also taking a public stance on issues they care about.  By taking these public stances foundations, like the Warhol foundation, gain attention and build awareness about these issues, in this example about AIDS.  In the art world, this type of advocacy is an essential part of the messages artist are spreading throughout their respective networks.  Without a strong backing, by foundations with a conscious like the ones described in this article, their messages carry significantly less weight.

Here's an article about the rise of giving from artist-endowed foundations.

How to Do Good and Prove It: Integrate Social Impact in Your Nonprofit's DNA

            I really enjoy reading about the methods of measuring effectiveness and impact of the nonprofits efforts.  This concept is crucial and there are many different angles of approach depending on the nature of the organization, some are going to be easier to analyze than others.  But, I think it is important to do our best to measure it no matter the difficulty of the task, and find ways that will not strain the working conditions anymore than they already are.  In the article, the author describes Kevin Starr’s Impact Approach, which to me looks and sounds like measuring effectiveness, just in different words.  I especially like the idea of scalability. This concept requires that the model of the nonprofit can be massively scaled up.  There is one very obvious caveat to this, which is that one size (or solutions) does not fit all (or heal all).  But, that mainly applies to cases that cannot be clean cut, and the models that work best are still up for debate. So when a model that works—and has been shown to work well—comes up for issues that are relatively clean cut, then scalability is an excellent requirement. 

Chapters 10 & 11: Funders & Mutual Benefit

            The message that I took away from this week’s chapter readings is that the interaction between nonprofits and businesses is just as important (if not more important in some cases) as their interaction with the government.  Funders accumulate their funds from business sector work, and choose carefully how and where to allocate it.  So much of what is provided to nonprofits comes from these funders, it is impossible to ignore the major role of both business and government in fueling nonprofit work.  

International Nonprofits

My favorite assignment for this week (by far) is the TED talk.  The speaker, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, discussed issues of infrastructure and discipline as the main hurdles that Africa as a continent needs to address before aid can really be effective.  This issue of infrastructure seems so obvious that it is like an elephant in the room. How can it be constantly overlooked? What is the US so afraid of? By investing time and money into infrastructure Africa would benefit in so many ways.  Like she mentioned, health care, education and agriculture would be way more effective if there were roads to transport people to and from the necessary locations to better utilize the help they receive.  If only, if only.  How do we facilitate such changes? Who makes the decisions to spend money on building infrastructure?  What is keeping such collaboration from happening? It seems like part of the answer to that question lies in the power that is held by western nations that use resources from Africa. It sucks to think that by keeping them disempowered we have more to gain. I truly believe that the opposite is true. Not only would empowerment achieve more effective aid but as Ngozi said, it would create more knowledge and better citizens of those nations and enrich our global environment.

            The economic failures talk, was interesting because Easterly addressed similar issues as Ngozi did. However, I wanted him to put forth some ideas about resolving or beginning to resolve the issue.  What problems needed to be fixed most? It got me wondering about effectiveness, something that prior to this course I had never thought about, and now am finding myself more and more interested in. So I looked up an article that you can find here, that discusses some of the conflicting experiences people from Peace Corps walk away with. 

            The Mercy Corps and UNDP sites were interesting in that they both showed differing stances on how to help populations in need. I really like the fact that MC works with people from the international communities that they serve, they are the main leaders in the community rather than white transplants that know relatively little about the cultural practices. This is a really important difference between them and Peace Corps.  I think it is crucial to support those within a community first and foremost.  While the UNDP seems to have really good intentions, I think their priorities list was pretty skewed in order to be a universal one size fit all solution.  These needs will be prioritized differently by each community, and within that community by the groups and individual differently. So how can we impose our own system of priority onto those we wish to help? It just doesn’t sound like help to me.

            Finally, the book chapter had some devastating information to report. I am curious (like everyone else) as to what these stats look like in today’s world. I also thought it was interesting that the author notes how little of the US’s GDP is devoted to foreign assistance, but I wonder what the private donations and service hours look like.