Showing posts with label NPPhilanthropyTrends. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NPPhilanthropyTrends. Show all posts

Thursday, March 28, 2013

The Secret to More Effective Philanthropy: Funding the Unknown - Forbes

The Secret to More Effective Philanthropy: Funding the Unknown - Forbes: What’s often forgotten in discussions of social investments, and measurements of their success, is that the first step in innovation is a step into the unknown. It requires curiosity and courage, leaps of faith for both the innovators and those who support them. When you trace the development of big new ideas, you often find that those first steps weren’t taken in isolation—they arose from the simple act of people talking and imagining potential solutions together.

Friday, February 15, 2013

Shar McBee: Best of Times, or the Worst of Times for Nonprofit Fundraising?

Shar McBee: Best of Times, or the Worst of Times for Nonprofit Fundraising?: At my local community college, enrollment is up 30 percent but the budget remains flat. Between 30,000 and 60,000 nonprofits disappeared last year and two-thirds of all charitable nonprofits experienced decreasing or stagnant contributions in the first nine months of 2012, according to GuideStar.

At the same time, tech moguls gave 1.4 billion to charity. Fidelity Charitable, an affiliate of Fidelity Investments, took in $3.6 billion, making it a record year and the stock market is at its highest level in five years.

So is it the best of times, or the worst of times for nonprofit fundraising?

Friday, September 07, 2012

Strategic Philanthropy: Who Wins and Loses? - NPQ – Nonprofit Quarterly - Promoting an active and engaged democracy.

Strategic Philanthropy: Who Wins and Loses? - NPQ – Nonprofit Quarterly - Promoting an active and engaged democracy.: I am beginning to believe that the notion of so-called “strategic philanthropy,” in all of its beguiling and shape-shifting forms, is a very powerful accomplice in transforming the funding ecology and structure of the nonprofit sector. Quite simply, it shifts the onus for creativity and decision making to those who have control of the finances and narrows, in many cases, the number of groups with whom philanthropists have to reciprocally communicate as they “focus” ever more acutely not just on the outcomes they hope for but on their preferred strategy for production of those outcomes. And this smaller number of grantees become the anointed—the chosen.