Top 10 Lessons from Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy
posted on: Thursday, April 14, 2011
By Christine Reeves
Last week, I attend the Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy (EPIP) 10th Anniversary Conference in Philadelphia. EPIP Executive Director Rusty Stahl and his team put together one of the best philanthropy conferences I have ever attended. Wonderfully rich and career-affirming, the conference avoided the philanthropic trap of only focusing on lofty goals. Instead, the conference honed in on ways of achieving practical, high-impact philanthropy that fosters meaningful careers and (more importantly) creates and advocates for solutions to help communities in need. I urge anyone age 40 or younger to join EPIP for the April 2012 Conference in Los Angeles.
I could quite possibly write a novel about what I learned and look forward to further researching. However, in the interest of saving my hands from Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, I’ll emulate a famous late night comedian: here is my David Letterman-esque top 10 list about the themes and take-home messages from the EPIP Conference:
(1) The Philanthropy Continuum
According to Emmett Carson, president and CEO of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, “charity and direct service” exist on one end of the philanthropy continuum and “systems change” exists on the other end. He explained what we all already know: most foundations use the words “change” and “improve” in their mission statements. However, are we changing and improving nonprofits and the community? Are we brave enough to self-reflect and analyze inequalities in established systems (including the ideas in our own foundations) and then put our full philanthropic weight behind changing and improving those systems?
This made me think: at the end of the day, do we view philanthropy as charity (Haves giving to Have-Nots, based on what the Haves independently predetermined as problems and solutions). Or, do we view philanthropy as a collaborative instrument of justice that can address root causes and systems change that will help level a very unlevel playing field just a little more?
I think we need to ask more “why” questions (the tougher, uncomfortable questions). Asking how many people we can feed, house and teach is commendable; but, asking why people are hungry, homeless and uneducated is crucial.
Where do you stand on the philanthropic continuum, and where would you like to stand?
(2) Neutral Convening Is Not An Option
Carson also discussed the increasingly popular task many foundations (especially community foundations) place on themselves, to the detriment of the communities they serve: serving as “neutral conveners” who bring different stakeholders to the table for a discussion.
“How can we be neutral about unemployment, education or racism?” he asked, before explaining, “We are neutral about sharing ideas and solutions, but not about the problems.” He concluded by saying, “[Let’s] ban that language and crush it whenever it pops its ugly head up.”
This made me consider the multi-pronged task at hand: how can foundations still convene and listen to all stakeholders (especially those in the community who traditionally lack power), while not being neutral about seeking solutions to problems? Let’s find common ground by discussing facts and opinions, but not confusing the two. Let’s invite stakeholders to meetings, but remember to seek out the quiet, powerless and the oft-forgotten stakeholders who usually are the most affected.
These ideas are abstract; what are more concrete ways of fostering neutral listening instead of neutral convening?
(3) Risk and New Mistakes
Gabriel Kasper, practitioner at the Monitor Institute, made a pithy and practical point. “Try to only make new mistakes.”
Foundations have incredible freedom. Although measurable outcomes and strategies are important, we cannot forget the importance of risk. Foundations can be laboratories. So long as we don’t keep repeating the same mistakes, let’s try new ideas. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funded a small project based on the idea that people in emergency situations should be able to call a phone number to get immediate help. That risk became a successful experiment that matured into 9-1-1.
Therefore, do we have a responsibility to be risk-takers?
(4) 5% Floor, Not Ceiling
Terry Odendahl, CEO of the Global Greengrants Fund, talked about the “5% rule.” Foundations are required to pay out at least 5 percent in their total annual giving. However, that rule was enacted by the government as a payout floor, not ceiling. Foundations, especially during stressful economic times, can pay out more than that from their endowments. When it’s pouring outside, let’s tap into our rainy day funds.
Yes, preserving endowments for undeniable future problems remains important. However, paying out 6 percent to fund innovations that address present problems will still allow foundations to fund solutions in the future.
(5) The Importance of Mentors
Odendahl and numerous other foundation leaders underscored the importance of finding a mentor. Finding a mentor to take to coffee or lunch can be invaluable. Since we never stop learning, even the mentors can learn new perspectives from us, the junior staffers.
When we get caught up in the daily grind of making-the-trains-run-on time, we should schedule time for expanding our viewpoints and seeing the bigger picture, both for gaining personal advice about career trajectory and knowledge of how we can do our current jobs better.
(6) Social Justice Philanthropy
Kaplana Krishnamurthy, EPIP consultant and Gender Justice Program and RACE program director at Western State Center, gave an incredibly interactive workshop presentation titled, “An Introduction to Social Justice Philanthropy.” She used NCRP materials, most of which can be found in the executive summary of Criteria for Philanthropy at Its Best. She asked us to define the elements and values of social justice philanthropy. Some had never heard the phrase, but in the next 5 minutes, people called out all sorts of ideas, saying it: - “Involves stakeholders”
- “Deeply analyzes problems”
- “Engages affected communities”
- “Promotes sustainability”
- “Creates systemic change… it’s not just a band-aid on a broken leg”
- “Targeted, not generic”
- “Addresses root causes of social, economic and racial equity”
- “Is responsive”
Krishnamurthy added social justice philanthropy’s five core elements and three core values: - Elements: (1) Program, (2) People, (3) Process, (4) Possessions and (5) Power
- Core Values: (1) Accountability, (2) Transparency and (3) Democracy
Do you include any of these elements or values in your grantmaking?
(7) Get Educated
Sherece West, president and CEO of the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation, stressed the importance of education. She earned three degrees, including both a master’s and doctorate in public policy. The degree helped her think more critically and gave her a helpful skill set, but she explained how her degrees also gave her more legitimacy. Her words and opinions carried more weight; therefore, her degree gave her opportunities to be a more successful advocate for the communities she served.
What importance do you place on post-graduate degrees?
(8) Disruptive Innovation
Sandra Vargas, president and CEO of the Minneapolis Foundation, talked about “disruptive innovation.” In order to create positive, lasting change for those in need, we have a responsibility to innovate, and, when needed, get a little disruptive.
But first, she explained the importance of doing our homework. We must consider the life experiences, perspectives, goals, concerns and power of those around us. Vargas talked about her past jobs, including her time working with contractors.
Studying human experiences helps our grantmaking. It made me consider my time as a waitress and how, in numerous respects, it was more valuable than my political and philanthropic internships.
What human experiences outside of your career path helped you become a better grantmaker?
(9) All We’ve Got Is A Pile of Money
Sterling Speirn, president and CEO of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, explained the humility and inabilities of foundations: “All we’ve got is a pile of money and that doesn’t do much unless you put it in the hands of someone who can change the world. … We need to physically get nonprofits off their bended knee and convince them, [we] aren’t smarter or more powerful than them.”
Grantmakers do not have it easy; they must say “no” to the majority of the worthy proposals that come across their desks. However, grantmaking isn’t about telling nonprofits “yes” or “no.” At its core, shouldn’t grantmaking put more of an emphasis on asking nonprofits what they need to succeed and then supporting those needs?
How does your foundation keep nonprofits off their “bended knee?”
(10) Already-Done List
Last but not least, I wanted to make a small confession. Sometimes, when I’m in a setting surrounded by inspirational people and ideas, I find myself equal parts motivated and fatigued. Where do I start? Should I focus on learning and listening before taking action? What does action look like? What does successful action look like? How can I best serve? How can I help those around me best serve?
A fellow conference attendee (who’s name I, unfortunately, cannot recall) said something that made me feel better. Each day, we look at our “To-Do Lists” and slowly, but surely cross off completed tasks. She suggested we create “Already-Done Lists.” That way, when we get tired or lose some motivation, we can feel rejuvenated when we see what we accomplished or helped others accomplish.
Christine Reeves in field associate of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). Labels: effective philanthropy, EPIP, marginalized communities, nonprofit-foundation partnership
By Christine Reeves
Last week, I attend the Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy (EPIP) 10th Anniversary Conference in Philadelphia. EPIP Executive Director Rusty Stahl and his team put together one of the best philanthropy conferences I have ever attended. Wonderfully rich and career-affirming, the conference avoided the philanthropic trap of only focusing on lofty goals. Instead, the conference honed in on ways of achieving practical, high-impact philanthropy that fosters meaningful careers and (more importantly) creates and advocates for solutions to help communities in need. I urge anyone age 40 or younger to join EPIP for the April 2012 Conference in Los Angeles.
I could quite possibly write a novel about what I learned and look forward to further researching. However, in the interest of saving my hands from Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, I’ll emulate a famous late night comedian: here is my David Letterman-esque top 10 list about the themes and take-home messages from the EPIP Conference:
(1) The Philanthropy Continuum
According to Emmett Carson, president and CEO of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, “charity and direct service” exist on one end of the philanthropy continuum and “systems change” exists on the other end. He explained what we all already know: most foundations use the words “change” and “improve” in their mission statements. However, are we changing and improving nonprofits and the community? Are we brave enough to self-reflect and analyze inequalities in established systems (including the ideas in our own foundations) and then put our full philanthropic weight behind changing and improving those systems?
This made me think: at the end of the day, do we view philanthropy as charity (Haves giving to Have-Nots, based on what the Haves independently predetermined as problems and solutions). Or, do we view philanthropy as a collaborative instrument of justice that can address root causes and systems change that will help level a very unlevel playing field just a little more?
I think we need to ask more “why” questions (the tougher, uncomfortable questions). Asking how many people we can feed, house and teach is commendable; but, asking why people are hungry, homeless and uneducated is crucial.
Where do you stand on the philanthropic continuum, and where would you like to stand?
(2) Neutral Convening Is Not An Option
Carson also discussed the increasingly popular task many foundations (especially community foundations) place on themselves, to the detriment of the communities they serve: serving as “neutral conveners” who bring different stakeholders to the table for a discussion.
“How can we be neutral about unemployment, education or racism?” he asked, before explaining, “We are neutral about sharing ideas and solutions, but not about the problems.” He concluded by saying, “[Let’s] ban that language and crush it whenever it pops its ugly head up.”
This made me consider the multi-pronged task at hand: how can foundations still convene and listen to all stakeholders (especially those in the community who traditionally lack power), while not being neutral about seeking solutions to problems? Let’s find common ground by discussing facts and opinions, but not confusing the two. Let’s invite stakeholders to meetings, but remember to seek out the quiet, powerless and the oft-forgotten stakeholders who usually are the most affected.
These ideas are abstract; what are more concrete ways of fostering neutral listening instead of neutral convening?
(3) Risk and New Mistakes
Gabriel Kasper, practitioner at the Monitor Institute, made a pithy and practical point. “Try to only make new mistakes.”
Foundations have incredible freedom. Although measurable outcomes and strategies are important, we cannot forget the importance of risk. Foundations can be laboratories. So long as we don’t keep repeating the same mistakes, let’s try new ideas. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funded a small project based on the idea that people in emergency situations should be able to call a phone number to get immediate help. That risk became a successful experiment that matured into 9-1-1.
Therefore, do we have a responsibility to be risk-takers?
(4) 5% Floor, Not Ceiling
Terry Odendahl, CEO of the Global Greengrants Fund, talked about the “5% rule.” Foundations are required to pay out at least 5 percent in their total annual giving. However, that rule was enacted by the government as a payout floor, not ceiling. Foundations, especially during stressful economic times, can pay out more than that from their endowments. When it’s pouring outside, let’s tap into our rainy day funds.
Yes, preserving endowments for undeniable future problems remains important. However, paying out 6 percent to fund innovations that address present problems will still allow foundations to fund solutions in the future.
(5) The Importance of Mentors
Odendahl and numerous other foundation leaders underscored the importance of finding a mentor. Finding a mentor to take to coffee or lunch can be invaluable. Since we never stop learning, even the mentors can learn new perspectives from us, the junior staffers.
When we get caught up in the daily grind of making-the-trains-run-on time, we should schedule time for expanding our viewpoints and seeing the bigger picture, both for gaining personal advice about career trajectory and knowledge of how we can do our current jobs better.
(6) Social Justice Philanthropy
Kaplana Krishnamurthy, EPIP consultant and Gender Justice Program and RACE program director at Western State Center, gave an incredibly interactive workshop presentation titled, “An Introduction to Social Justice Philanthropy.” She used NCRP materials, most of which can be found in the executive summary of Criteria for Philanthropy at Its Best. She asked us to define the elements and values of social justice philanthropy. Some had never heard the phrase, but in the next 5 minutes, people called out all sorts of ideas, saying it:
- “Involves stakeholders”
- “Deeply analyzes problems”
- “Engages affected communities”
- “Promotes sustainability”
- “Creates systemic change… it’s not just a band-aid on a broken leg”
- “Targeted, not generic”
- “Addresses root causes of social, economic and racial equity”
- “Is responsive”
Krishnamurthy added social justice philanthropy’s five core elements and three core values:
- Elements: (1) Program, (2) People, (3) Process, (4) Possessions and (5) Power
- Core Values: (1) Accountability, (2) Transparency and (3) Democracy
Do you include any of these elements or values in your grantmaking?
(7) Get Educated
Sherece West, president and CEO of the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation, stressed the importance of education. She earned three degrees, including both a master’s and doctorate in public policy. The degree helped her think more critically and gave her a helpful skill set, but she explained how her degrees also gave her more legitimacy. Her words and opinions carried more weight; therefore, her degree gave her opportunities to be a more successful advocate for the communities she served.
What importance do you place on post-graduate degrees?
(8) Disruptive Innovation
Sandra Vargas, president and CEO of the Minneapolis Foundation, talked about “disruptive innovation.” In order to create positive, lasting change for those in need, we have a responsibility to innovate, and, when needed, get a little disruptive.
But first, she explained the importance of doing our homework. We must consider the life experiences, perspectives, goals, concerns and power of those around us. Vargas talked about her past jobs, including her time working with contractors.
Studying human experiences helps our grantmaking. It made me consider my time as a waitress and how, in numerous respects, it was more valuable than my political and philanthropic internships.
What human experiences outside of your career path helped you become a better grantmaker?
(9) All We’ve Got Is A Pile of Money
Sterling Speirn, president and CEO of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, explained the humility and inabilities of foundations: “All we’ve got is a pile of money and that doesn’t do much unless you put it in the hands of someone who can change the world. … We need to physically get nonprofits off their bended knee and convince them, [we] aren’t smarter or more powerful than them.”
Grantmakers do not have it easy; they must say “no” to the majority of the worthy proposals that come across their desks. However, grantmaking isn’t about telling nonprofits “yes” or “no.” At its core, shouldn’t grantmaking put more of an emphasis on asking nonprofits what they need to succeed and then supporting those needs?
How does your foundation keep nonprofits off their “bended knee?”
(10) Already-Done List
Last but not least, I wanted to make a small confession. Sometimes, when I’m in a setting surrounded by inspirational people and ideas, I find myself equal parts motivated and fatigued. Where do I start? Should I focus on learning and listening before taking action? What does action look like? What does successful action look like? How can I best serve? How can I help those around me best serve?
A fellow conference attendee (who’s name I, unfortunately, cannot recall) said something that made me feel better. Each day, we look at our “To-Do Lists” and slowly, but surely cross off completed tasks. She suggested we create “Already-Done Lists.” That way, when we get tired or lose some motivation, we can feel rejuvenated when we see what we accomplished or helped others accomplish.
Christine Reeves in field associate of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP).
Labels: effective philanthropy, EPIP, marginalized communities, nonprofit-foundation partnership
posted by Christine Reeves at
3:19 PM
4 Comments:
Christine, thank you for the sobering comment on #9 'All we’ve got is a pile of money and that doesn’t do much unless you put it in the hands of someone who can change the world'. The most frustrating part of our jobs is knowing we have a today and now solution based on 20 years on the ground experience with face to face interaction yet being told that unless we have the right format, language and strategy in grant appealing and the manpower for endless reports and millions in past given grants we can't get passed the first line of approval. While the process is understood and reports necessary, if only for our own evaluation, it would be nice to meet someone/foundation who would come on the ground, walk with us in our face to face meetings and HEAR our ideas where problems meet success. We will continue engaging in grant writing as a necessary requirement but your perspective, or that of Mr. Speirn, is a much appreciate view. Writing from Zambia - Overland Missions.
By
Sharon, at 8:43 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
Christine Reeves, at 10:59 AM
Sharon,
Thank you for offering your perspective. I'm glad the work of NCRP resonates with you. NCRP began by serving as the voice of nonprofit organizations (when we have conversations with grantmakers). We see the grantmaker-nonprofit relationship as a partnership. The former has money, while the latter has (as you explained) "on the ground experience," connections, and wealth of knowledge about how to bring grantmaking ideas to fruition. In our society, money is often equated with power. However, we must all see "on the ground experience" as a different, but equally important form of power; otherwise, we will perpetuate problems, by spending money without creating solutions on the ground.
By
Christine Reeves, at 11:02 AM
Thank you for responding Christine. I don't wish to sound negative towards grant makers as this partnership is many times the very life saving factor for the people we serve. Gifts that we as non-profits are not able to share as we dedicate our time to the process of improvement and not the funding of it. It is however the method of acquiring the partnership that can be frustrating and where I'd like to see a more personal alternative as opposed to being required to compete with experienced language artists with little to no ground experience. Your article and topics of the EPIP conference resonated the heart of philanthropy, "love your neighbor as you love yourself'. Who would not take risks, learn more, give more, and pursue solutions for the improvement of their own families? To that goal we continue to work together and pursue better ways.
By
Sharon, at 3:24 AM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Blog Home