|
ARCHIVE
|
HB40, Transparency in Government, Nonprofits & Elections
August 27, 2008
|
E-governance, Prenatal Care in Utah
June 25, 2008
|
Governance, State Budget Reports
May 29, 2008
|
Childhood Obesity, Stadium Funding, Local Economic Development
April 30, 2008
|
State Rankings, Healthcare Legislation
March 26, 2008
|
[MORE]
|
|
|  |
|
|
Things Change, Including Philanthropy - We Should Get Used to it!
by Don Gomes, Executive Director, Utah Nonprofits Association
Setting the Stage
The philanthropy we’ve
known has changed, and it will change even more. Much the same can be said for the issues that nonprofit and other
community groups face. In June, Steve
Gunderson, President and CEO of the Council on Foundations, spoke to groups of
funders and nonprofit professionals in Salt Lake City. Among other things, he noted five trends
that may reshape philanthropy: 1) emerging donors represent a new diversity in
philanthropy; 2) new approaches focus on long-term impacts; 3) there is an
increasing complexity and worldwide scope of issues being addressed by
nonprofits; 4) public scrutiny will not decrease; and 5) a proliferation of
players is inevitable.
The Voice of Perspective
According to Mr. Gunderson,
there are several trends that may reshape philanthropy, not just in Utah, but
worldwide. First, emerging donors represent a new diversity in philanthropy. Among other things, young high net worth
donors havewealth that is typically
"new," not inherited; they are not as risk averse as their older
counterparts; their motivation is primarily mission driven, not tax-break
driven. Younger donors are engaged and
"control centric," and are interested in targeted giving to address
specific problems.
Many new donors are looking for new vehicles. They often work with professionals outside
the nonprofit ranks, such as financial firms and wealth management pros or even
start their own foundations. Online
giving is often second nature to them. Many
see current foundations and their operations as old and sometimes cumbersome.
Next, new approaches seek a
focus not just on outcomes (the annual compilation of program results), but
also long-term impact (systemic and social change). This is illustrated by the recognition that new communication such
as targeted use of email and various social media is needed for the emerging
generation of givers. The future
includes consideration of web-based philanthropy and web-based charity as sources
for strategic and heart-driven giving.
These vehicles have been growing very quickly and become for now a
valuable addition to traditional methods.
Third, Mr. Gunderson noted
an increasing complexity and worldwide scope of issues that are being
addressed: environment, immigration, global health, global economy, global
warming, and education. My take is that
these issues mean we need to recognize that “our world” is not just our block,
our neighborhood, or even our state.
Fourth, public scrutiny
will not decrease. Transparency and
accountability will be even more aggressively pursued. Gunderson posited that the press loves to
target philanthropy, and media scrutiny leads to public scrutiny. He reminded all that abuse often leads to
new regulations. Scrutiny will also
focus on the new diversity in philanthropy and any disproportionate giving. But public scrutiny, in my view, is a
terrific tool to show how much we mean to lives in our communities.
Finally, a proliferation of
players is inevitable. The nonprofit
sector is growing. There are more needs
and a wide range of emerging ideas.
Philanthropy is growing. At the
end of 2007, there were nearly 1.2 million 501(c)(3) organizations in the
U.S. This is an all time high. Mr. Gunderson made special note of the
philanthropic landscape of Utah. He
noted that Utah has about 0.7% of the U.S. population, but giving equals 1.4%
of American giving. He acknowledged
that religious giving makes up much of the differential, but also made the
point that a spirit of giving is apparent in Utah.
What Now?
Sustainability for
nonprofit organizations and community efforts across America and in Utah will
require an examination of many roles. Gunderson’s
points raise important questions for nonprofits to consider, such as:
- Does the traditional foundation, as we know it,
have continued relevance with increasing community demands?
- Will business shrink from community commitments
in the face of economic pressures?
Can we maintain the loyalty and financial partnership of
individuals?
- Where it is appropriate, can some of the
concepts of social entrepreneurship make a difference?
- Are we as nonprofits really ready and able to
embrace and communicate with a new generation of givers and executives?
As we balance mission and
money, we can’t stop seeking givers to partner with us. The journey we take them on is about
changing the world, or our part of it.
Even in tough times, people give because they are asked and want to be
part of something important.
References:
Find the Giving USA 2008 report at www.givinginstitute.org
[PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
