Family Foundation Information

Policy Discussion is all in the Family

Wednesday, May 5, 2010 by Mike Howland

I’ve just returned from the SECF Family Foundations Forum in Charleston, South Carolina. It was an incredibly rich and meaningful time together, complete with ample opportunities for foundation networking and much sharing of great grantmaking resources. Once again, I was impressed with the level of engagement among the 70 trustees and staff who attended. Their commitment to their foundations and communities, and their sincere desire to continually learn how to do their great work even better, is truly inspirational.

One saying popped up a few times during this meeting, “If you’ve seen one family foundation, you’ve seen one family foundation.” That’s very true. Family foundations are in essence extensions of the families that steward them, and are every bit as diverse. It spawned some great discussions and exchanges of ideas.

One topic that generated discussion was that of politics and philanthropy and, specifically, the relationship between our field and government in light of the new administration. To me, it underscored the point that the jury is still out on whether a deeper level of engagement from government will be a plus or minus for our field.

Some of the discussion centered around last week’s article in the Wall Street Journal about the very palpable mutual admiration between foundations and the current administration at the Council on Foundations meeting. But I was at that meeting, as well as other philanthropy conferences, and I've also heard a different view. Many were still feeling the sting of the proposed cap on charitable deductions in 2009, which was beaten back with bipartisan opposition, but has reappeared in the President’s 2011 budget.

Then there’s also the question of the Social Innovation Fund. Many applaud it, and it will no doubt have a significant impact on some terrific organizations. There’s another perspective, however, that the White House, in creating this fund and the bureaucracy to support it, essentially is saying they think the government can affect change and invest this money better than foundations.

It’s still too early to tell. I believe that the real litmus test for the Obama Administration and its embrace of philanthropy and supportive philanthropy policy may not come until we see what happens when and if tax reform arrives on the front burner.

But there’s one key observation that comes from being among our family foundation members this week. Legislation and policy have alternatively targeted or all but ignored philanthropy for generations. And for generations, families with charitable values have found a way to keep the foundation fires burning.

I Am Not Alone

Monday, May 3, 2010 by Guest Blogger

This guest post comes from Gilbert Miller, a trustee of the Beloco Foundation in Columbus, Georgia. Gilbert is participating in a panel discussion of next generation trustees at the SECF Family Foundations Forum, entitled "Where You Lead, I Might Follow — Perspectives from the Next Generation.

I am not alone!

Those words keep coming to mind at every session of this year's Family Foundations Forum. It's long been the secret shame of our foundation that things weren't as 'together' as they may seem. We disagree on grant requests, we have a hard time assessing positive change and gift effectiveness, we often struggle with what our 'next steps' should be. Sometimes it feels like we're just not adequate enough to be tasked with the awesome responsibility of granting funds to the communities and efforts we love so much.

But it turns out, we're not alone.

The 'we' I now refer to includes over sixty members of the Southeastern Council of Foundations, from family foundations across the Southeast. They, too, share the same concerns and face similar struggles behind their own closed doors. Their difficulties are very much like those I have faced. The relief that brings is comforting, to say the least.

What's more, the power to reference each other's challenges and share in the solutions and outcomes has already benefited our foundation tremendously. The network of individuals here, from all backgrounds and experiences, has provide a deep well of knowledge to draw from. A simple suggestion of a pie chart in a meeting this morning solved a long-standing issue of how best to communicate current requests and their relationship to our capacity to give. That's just one 'ah-ha' moment. There were dozens of others by lunchtime.

Entering the SECF's afternoon session, my 'we' and I are emboldened and hopeful. We stand together knowing that somewhere among our shared experiences are answers to long held questions. We know that our faults can be fixed and that our futures will be bright. We can finally rest in knowing that, while the work ahead may prove difficult, our success is no longer in question. We now have friends who have been there; friends who are on the other side, showing us the way; friends who offer help whenever it is need.

We are not alone.

Always Make Time for a Story

Monday, April 19, 2010 by Guest Blogger

Susan Price is Vice President of the National Center for Family Philanthropy, and a featured keynote speaker at the upcoming SECF Family Foundations Forum in Charleston, SC, May 2-4. Click here for more information and online registration.

I recently returned from a week of storytelling camp. This is a great opportunity offered periodically by a family foundation trustee in Connecticut to a small group staffers from various nonprofits. The camp was led by Donald Davis, a nationally recognized storyteller from North Carolina, who believes that telling stories and listening carefully to others’ stories can further greater understanding and bridge divides among people. He urged us take our time in telling our stories because details paint a clearer picture for the listener. It reminded me of the time a few years ago when I participated in the Southeastern Council’s family foundation forum in Mobile, AL. I was surprised to see on the agenda that the first hour was listed as “Introductions.”

As a bit of a Type A personality who favors fast-paced programs, I couldn’t fathom how it would take that long for the participants to say their names and identify their foundations. Turns out, each one told a little story, combining various pieces of their family’s philanthropic history, their grantmaking and something about a recent success or current challenge. The introductions took up every bit of that hour. And it was the best part of the program! I was enchanted with the passion of the speakers, and Iearned so much about how they go about their work. I shouldn’t have been surprised. We know from research that family foundation representatives who attend conferences tend to rank “networking” a bit higher than “attending concurrent sessions or plenaries,” not because the formal program isn’t valuable, but because connecting with peers can have the biggest payoff over the long term. We want to hear the stories. Some of the best ideas come from other foundations who have “been there, and done that.” Connections made at a conference can last a lifetime. I can’t wait to attend this year’s forum to hear everyone’s stories—in the hall, at a meal, or during a session. Take your time telling them. I’m not in a hurry.

Susan C. Price
Vice President
National Center for Family Philanthropy

"Quality Time" for Family Foundations

Friday, April 9, 2010 by Guest Blogger

Cookie Sprouse is executive director of The Chapin Foundation in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina and has worked in family philanthropy for more than 25 years. As a grandmother herself, she has a strong personal passion for fostering philanthropy in future generations.

I just registered for the Family Foundations Forum in Charleston, May 2-4, and I’m already so excited I can hardly stand it. This meeting is always very special to me, because it is the one time each year when I can get together with a small group of other family foundation staff and trustees and talk comfortably about the things that really matter. It’s where, instead of feeling like a number, I can feel like I’m among, well, family.

Gatherings like these are important in any profession, but I think especially so in philanthropy. There is a great deal of intimacy in our work, between our foundations and the communities we serve, and among those who govern us. Having an intimate setting in which to feel “safe” as you learn, make connections and even admit your weaknesses is really a blessing. It’s an opportunity for professional and personal development that I would hate to miss.

Plus, I have to admit that being in Charleston this year gives the whole thing an extra layer of charm. I was reared 70 miles from Charleston so I consider myself a “Carolina Low Country Girl.” The month of May will be a beautiful time! In addition to a really solid and exciting program, there will be plenty of opportunities to enjoy the amenities of the Holy City! In particular, I’m looking forward to the Low Country boil on Sullivan’s Island and a special reception at The American College of Building Arts. Historic and architectural preservation are strong in Charleston, and the city provides a perfect backdrop to our discussions of stewardship and cultivating future generations.

If you haven’t had time to register yet, I hope you will. (It’s so easy!) I’d love to see you among my friends in family philanthropy in Charleston!

- Cookie Sprouse

GUEST POST - A Snapshot from Foundations on the Hill

Wednesday, March 24, 2010 by Mike Howland

We've all just returned from Foundations on the Hill, and today I offer my blog space to Helen Ishii, our director of member and government affairs, who led SECF's charge of 50 people up the steps of Capitol Hill and lived to tell about it. The results were the best we've seen from any Foundations on the Hill event to date. My hat's off to Helen for pulling us all together. Here's her reflection from the experience:

I'm sitting across from a couple of very bright Congressional staffers, making idle chit chat and finding connections with less than six degrees of separation, as we await Rep. Boozman (D-AR-3rd) to return from a vote to meet with us. I appreciate that the Congressman finds our visit important enough to return to the office, especially as it's now 5:00 p.m. I also appreciate that in every office we've visited today, someone in our group has found a personal connection to at least one staffer and also often to the Member of Congress. These personal connections have proven important over the years as they are often what makes a staffer or Member comfortable calling on us as a resource.

This is my 6th trek to DC for Foundations on the Hill. This physically exhausting trip has become a valued annual event for our members, 50 of whom made it this year. These hearty souls put many miles on their soles as they walk and walk and walk the halls on the Hill. This year they have visited 94 Members of Congress from the 11 states in the Southeastern Council of Foundations' (SECF) region. Every year we return to educate the ever revolving supply of extremely young, extremely bright and extremely inexperienced staffers about the work of foundations, as well as to inform Members of Congress on the issues impacting our sector.

This year I joined our teams from Arkansas and South Carolina as they made their visits. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) immediately "got" the importance of basing the TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families) funding formula upon need and the benefit that would accrue to all Southern states. She also remarked about how helpful it was to have the same message delivered to her Southern colleagues by other SECF members.

Everyone saw how a cap on charitable deductions could be harmful to the sector. As to be expected, the chair of the House Budget Committee, Rep. John Spratt (D-SC-5th) asked about the "scoring" of H.R. 4090, which will simplify the private foundation excise tax to a flat rate. We were able to answer his question, thanks to the briefings we'd received from COF the day before. Soon, blessedly soon, I'll be walking to the METRO to catch a flight home, where I'll finally be able to soak my aching feet and begin my thank you notes to continue the relationships begun today.

- Helen Ishii, SECF Director of Member and Government Relations

Why Effective Philanthropy Isn't Democratic

Monday, January 4, 2010 by Betsey Russell

I've been mentally wrestling lately with the tension that appears to be growing in our country between democracy and philanthropy. (It's a fun mental exercise when one is pretending to nap in order to avoid an excess of familial love over the holidays.)

For those of you who are sticklers for semantics, in my mental arguments, I consider democracy in the purest form: one person, one vote. I also simply "philanthropy" to mean "charitable giving."

The Chase online giving debacle and the concept of "voting" for philanthropic decisions brought this question to a head for me. After announcing with great fanfare that they would provide a transparent way for Facebook users to determine how $4 million in corporate philanthropy would be disbursed, Chase took down their public scoreboard and reined in their process when the top vote-getters turned out to be causes that Chase found to be too controversial. The result has been some significant brand backlash for Chase.

But even if Chase hadn't chickened out, would this approach to giving really have been effective? What knowledge did the thousands or millions of voters bring to the process other than the know-how to click a button when asked?

For me, it underscores something that I've stated before: effective philanthropy is NOT a democratic undertaking. Instead, philanthropy is a very personal method of providing support to a cause or addressing an issue that resonates with the giver or givers. While I do believe that a variety of educated perspectives help strengthen understanding and result in better decision-making, I think opening that process to the masses simply makes it a free-for-all or popularity contest.

One of the best means that I've seen of combining a focused approach AND a variety of perspectives to make effective giving decisions takes place at the Atlanta Women's Foundation. Their grantmaking committees extend beyond the board of directors to include women of all races and from all economic strata. These women gather together several times over the course of the grantmaking process, attend site visits together, and have passionate, intense discussions about which organizations will have the greatest impact on Atlanta's most vulnerable women and children. It's a heart-wrenching process that I've been through more than once.

And there is never, ever, a single vote taken.

It's not a democracy. It's an educated, informed consensus. It leaves open questions and possibilities for the next go round, and engages its participants far beyond a simple "aye" or "nay." It's very hard work — and educating broader audiences about its effectiveness is even harder. But it beats a popularity contest any day.

The Challenge Grant as Foundation Marketing Tool

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 by Betsey Russell

Today I read an article about the importance of challenge grants by Michael Kaiser, CEO of The Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Huffington Post. He writes specifically about the arts and arts grantmaking, but his points are well taken - particularly this one:

"Too many organizations that receive this first big grant build the infrastructure to support their new, increased programming without thinking about the day the grant period ends."

Amen, brother. And this goes for foundations as well. Sure, there's the regular work of administering a multi-year grant and the occasional story about it in the annual report or newsletter, but foundations usually miss the boat when it comes to really tapping into their ability to share their messages and mission in a truly meaningful way with others in their community.

Kaiser says,

"I have long lobbied foundations to make their grants to smaller organizations in the form of challenge grants. A challenge grant must be matched by other contributions, often by new gifts or increased gifts from existing donors. By forcing the organization to build a new, larger donor base during the grant period, the transition when the grant is over is eased. The foundation's money might be gone but the new donors attracted by the match help fill the void.

But many foundations simply do not want to do the oversight work required of administering a challenge grant. And if the foundation is not far-sighted enough to give a matching grant, the organization must be disciplined and smart enough to create its own challenge grant. The senior staff and board must use the grant period to build its donor base. A serious, concerted effort to attract new donors must be pursued."

Obviously, a challenge grant creates a solid marketing opportunity for any nonprofit, but think of what if can also do for the foundation. A community foundation, for instance, could offer its own donor advisors the opportunity to contribute to the challenge and subsequently mobilize a corps of brand ambassadors. A private or family foundation could convene community discussions about the arts (or homelessness, or whatever the issue) during the challenge grant period to stimulate more engagement and elevate its reputation as a servant leadership organization. Corporate grantmakers could couple the challenge grant with a cause marketing opportunity, engaging customers with the nonprofit in question while promoting their own corporate social responsibility. Foundation executives of all stripes could serve on discussion panels, provide newspaper editorials, or even serve as a media resource for the issue addressed by the challenge grant.

None of these are "one-off" opportunities. They can continue throughout the life of a challenge grant.

In engaging in marketing activities of this type, the foundation wins by elevating its profile as an engaged, caring member (even leader) of the community. The nonprofit wins through increased opportunities to cultivate more donors (which is also a win for the foundation). And the community wins through greater understanding of the issues it faces and the people and organizations that are tackling those issues.

We Exist, Therefore . . .

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 by Suzanna Stribling

Like my earlier post about the death of conferences, many have predicted the decline of associations in light of the many online, tailored connections that professionals now enjoy. For those of us working in philanthropy, where it seems a new association or “affinity group” pops up every day, this is news indeed.

So I ask myself, why do associations exist? Why does SECF exist? (Full disclosure: I’ve just sat for the Certified Association Executive exam so I've been thinking a lot about this...

Kevin Holland, on his blog Associations Inc., says: “Associations do not exist to "associate." They exist to promote the interests of the constituencies they represent.” He calls associations to task for merely duplicating “best practices” across various types of associations – meetings, newsletters, blogs, etc. – without really learning about the unique needs of their respective members and finding the point of collective leverage for them.

This year, SECF has spent a lot of time crafting a new strategic plan to better serve the private foundations, family foundations, community foundations and corporate grantmakers who gather under the SECF umbrella to promote their common interests. One of its elements is about just that – promoting the interests of philanthropy in the southeast by supporting the development of state-based grantmaker associations.

Why? Because if philanthropy is going to have a strong voice, it must mirror the political structure we live in – the federal, state, local model. Grantmakers must come together along geographic lines, not because they don’t also need to work globally, but because that’s where the point of leverage is. Associations work along a continuum, from technical assistance to one member to policy action on behalf of the whole. All the elements of association work are helpful to a field but it’s that work to congeal the collective voice that is most challenging and holds the most rewards.

We are your association. You pay your dues every year. Why do you think it’s important for us to exist?

Philanthropy by Popular Vote?

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 by Betsey Russell

As a communications professional, I was in awe of Barack Obama's campaign for the presidency. He reached through the Internet and tapped the passion of thousands of people who had felt disenfranchised by the political system. He mobilized them and created a dramatic shift in the way politicians now view the public.

To my way of thinking, that was a resurgence of true democracy: one person, one vote, re-engaged via social media. Not everyone liked it, of course, because it did tip the balance of power and shake up the status quo.

That said, it calls into question the value of evaluating and mobilizing popular will versus taking a more studied and strategic approach to creating change.

Now, I see this same question coming from inside the philanthropic sector. It started with Facebook's "causes" pages and other social media outlets, where like-minded individuals could rally around shared concerns, pool donations, get engaged as volunteers. But earlier this week, FastCompany posted an article about the new Chase Community Giving Program, a collaboration between Chase and Facebook that will allow users to vote on how Chase will spend $4 million from its corporate philanthropy fund. There are 500,000 charities in the running.

According to the article, "The charity receiving the most votes will receive $1 million, the top 5 runners up will get $100,000 each, and 100 finalists will get $25,000 each. It's all money that Chase would give to charities anyway, but this is the first time that the bank is crowdsourcing its decisions."

"Crowdsourcing," or abdicating?

To say I have mixed feelings about this is an understatement.

On one hand, I'm excited that hundreds of thousands of Facebook users might engage in thoughts of philanthropy, learn about what different nonprofits are doing, and hopefully ignite a personal spark of giving and engagement that will pervade their behavior going forward and result in an even more generous society going forward. I recently heard Aaron Dorfman of the National Center for Responsive Philanthropy cite studies showing that the wisdom of a semi-educated crowd often resulted in better decisions than a homogeneous panel of "experts." That could be true, depending on your definition of "better decisions."

On the other hand, there's the danger that the "winners" in this type of contest are the nonprofits with the best social media engines, not the best or most effective programs. As nonprofits and foundations increasingly come under attack for not doing enough, popular support could be a tempting way to fend off proposed charity or foundation legislation or negative press. I worry that strategic philanthropy could go the way of politics — where popular support at all costs becomes the prize, rather than actually creating a positive impact. Support will come at the expense of doing the more difficult work of demonstrating true effectiveness.

That leads to a point about corporate social responsibility. Are the leaders of Chase's corporate giving just going to become keyboard jockeys? Have they all been laid off? Is crowdsourcing Chase's new attempt at free outsourcing? Or is it just a way to avoid making some tough decisions?

The blog Modern Giving examined a few of the pros and cons of crowd sourcing in July, including a description of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation's Knight News Challenge as an example. (To me, the News Challenge was a great example of crowdsourcing ideas in a more defined and effective way.)

Don't get me wrong: I believe that crowdsourcing is here to stay. I also believe that it may prove to be an effective tool for raising awareness and potentially creating positive change.

But I also think it won't make the difficult task of explaining the work and the value of private foundations, family foundations, community foundations or corporate philanthropy any easier.

What to YOU think?

Let the Philanthro-Networking Begin!

Tuesday, November 10, 2009 by Betsey Russell

There are already many people arriving in Memphis for the Southeastern Council of Foundations Annual Meeting, and watching people greet their colleagues is truly uplifting.

Foundation executives, trustees, and staff of all stripes are converging here in the Peabody for three days of intense discussion about grantmaking resources, philanthropy policy, foundation legislation, and success stories and best practices from around the region. The content of this meeting will no doubt be phenomenal, but there's another lesson that's quickly learned by watching this group gather: Philanthropy is, and always will be, best facilitated through human interaction.

The family foundations, corporate grantmakers, community foundations and private foundations gathered here all share a common passion to serve their fellow man. We will talk in depth about strategy and practice, internal concerns and external perspectives. We will engage in discussions about education, health, art, community development, economics, leadership, communications, governance, the environment, effectiveness, partnership, advocacy and stewardship. But we will also share the joy that the work of philanthropy brings, and relish the face-to-face dialogs that are harder and harder to come by.

Relationships that are born and/or sustained throughout the year via technology will become stronger with a handshake or a hug. New ideas will be generated. Meaning and feeling and passion for those ideas will be communicated with facial expressions and tone of voice.

In other words, we're all here together to truly appreciate one another and strengthen the work we do.

It doesn't get much better than this.

Our Conference is Not Dead!

Friday, October 30, 2009 by Suzanna Stribling

In the race up to our annual meeting in Memphis, I was startled to find in my inbox a link to Nathaniel Whittemore’s post “The Conference is Dead…(Does Anyone Care?).”

Well, I care.

We’ve spent countless hours over the past year working to welcome more than 500 foundation executives and trustees to an event that we proudly think of as the premier gathering of philanthropic leaders in the South. It’s been that way for 40 years and we’ve not seen much drop off in this year's attendance in spite of the dire predictions about meeting budgets, travel restrictions and too much to do.

Whittemore goes on to explain that what he really means is that “the conference model we have today - keynotes, plenary sessions, networking breaks, etc - is dead. And good riddance.”

I couldn’t agree more.

I’ve spent the last week planning for several face-to-face gatherings of our members and have given a lot of thought to the content of these events, always mindful of the best ways to serve our members. We’re constantly talking about how to make meetings fulfilling for members – What do they want? What do they need? What will inspire them? How best to facilitate sharing? And reviewing what I know to be true about our members -- grantmakers:

They’re smart – working for the common good -- whether it’s the arts, health or education -- takes know-how and the ability to perceive the interconnectedness in communities. No ostriches here.

They’re accomplished – most of our members came to the field after significant achievement in other fields.

They’re lonely – that thing about “you’ve had your last bad meal?” True. It’s also true that many grantmakers work alone and straddle the sometimes uncomfortable space between their grantees and their trustees. There aren’t a lot of people in the community that have their kind of job.

They’re challenged – it really is harder than it looks.

They’re very busy.

So, what I’ve learned is that all we really have to do is get them in a room together and provide useful tools for them to get the most out of their time together. From each other. Not from talking heads.

So here’s our pledge: we won’t have plenary sessions or panels or keynotes in 2010 unless they are knock-your-socks-off good. And we’ll always provide the open space for you to learn and share, be nourished and inspired, have fun and get the professional value you expect from us when you’ve taken the time to come together.

Dead? Or deal? What do you think?

Save the dates and don't miss SECF's 2010 Conference on Investing for Foundations at the J.W. Marriott Hotel in Atlanta and the Family Foundations Forum at the Charleston Doubletree in the Historic District, May 2-4.