Foundation Trustee

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

The Lack of Standards Can Kill!

Tuesday, April 6, 2010 by Guest Blogger

Ron Hagan is a featured speaker at the upcoming SECF Conference on Investing for Foundations, April 22-23 in Atlanta. Click here to learn more or to register.

Standards are something that most of us accept as part of our everyday life. They have become such an integral part of our existence that the average person gives little or no thought to everyday products and services, and how they work. Standards make modern conveniences possible: light bulbs fit into lamps, electronic files are transferred over the Internet, trains move between states because the tracks are the same gauge, and the list goes on.

The American National Standards Institute defines a standard as "a recognized unit of comparison by which the correctness of others can be determined." Simply put, standards make life safer and help organizations operate more efficiently.

In spite of the vital role that trustees of foundations play in protecting the economic health of charitable institutions, uniform standards that define how they should perform their fiduciary duty do not exist. The investment community compounds the risk for donors caused by the lack of a fiduciary standard. For example, procedures vary greatly from one investment firm to another for selecting and monitoring money managers and the securities in which they invest. The reason; firms that provide investment advice, manage mutual funds, and offer alternative investing programs have yet to adopt common rules.

Imagine if airplane manufacturers had no standards to guide the way wings are made. Many airplanes just would not fly and there would be no commercial aviation industry. Yet tens of thousands of transactions, affecting the accounts of donors and beneficiaries, are handled every day without a recognized standard for managing the investment decision-making process at foundations.

No better example of the catastrophic effect of the lack of standards exists than events of September 11, 2001. In the communications world, interoperability is very important. It is a word that describes how electronics equipment exchanges information directly and satisfactorily between devices and their users. On September 11th, many emergency response agencies were unable to communicate due to the use of different communications equipment and frequencies. The Department of Defense reported later that hundreds of people died on September 11th due to the lack of a needed communication standard. Because of the unfortunate lessons learned at the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, local, state, and federal emergency agencies are all looking for universally accepted interoperability standards and equipment to enable radio and telephone communication between responding units. Sadly, their efforts are too late to save victims of the 9/11 attacks.

While it is unlikely that people will die from the lack of fiduciary standards, the economic threat is wreaking havoc. Massive fraud cases like the Madoff and Stanford Group’s Ponzi schemes gained their start because fiduciary standards were missing. Although more subtle, a just as serious danger lurks. The difficulty fiduciaries have in benchmarking investment firms’ practices, due to the absence of standards, sets up the potential for the depletion of asset values from undisclosed fees and conflicts of interest.

The lack of standards to guide the conduct of fiduciaries is primarily responsible for the uncertainty felt by trustees and members of investment committees. Confusion and chaos in committee rooms are symptoms of a similar situation that existed on a wide scale right after World War II. The realignment of nations quickly showed that a less regional and more global economy was forming. In order to ensure that products and services could move across borders, standardized ways of making them were needed to guarantee their quality. Just as countries needed standards to make global commerce safe and profitable, so, too, foundations need uniform process standards for its fiduciaries and their investment providers.

Ronald E. Hagan

Chairman of the Board of Directors - The Investment Fiduciary Leadership Council

www.iflcouncil.org

Ron Hagan has served as chairman of the non-profit Investment Fiduciary Leadership Council since 2008. He is also President and CEO of Roland|Criss which is a Professional Fiduciary Organization serving foundations and pension plans in a named fiduciary capacity. Ron has a lengthy career in helping trustees develop their oversight skills in the four disciplines for fiduciaries; governance, controls and practices, administration, and investments. Prior to joining the Roland|Criss team he was a Senior Vice President and member of the Executive Committee of the First National Bank of Commerce where he served as a fiduciary on its Asset Liability Management Committee. Earlier in his career Ron was a Principal with Booz, Allen & Hamilton. His duties at Booz, Allen included advising executives of Fortune 500 companies on prudent fiduciary processes.

Do we leave the fate of philanthropy to business?

Friday, March 5, 2010 by Betsey Russell

In a recent column in Business Lexington, Anne Nash, a philanthropic advisor in Lexington, Kentucky, offered a fairly comprehensive summary of the ways in which the field of grantmaking is beginning to shift. In short, the lines between traditional grantmaking and business models seem to be getting more and more blurred. Perhaps one day, it will be difficult to distinguish between a grantmaking foundation and business empire.

Not that I completely disagree; there are plenty of arguments out there for adopting a more rigorous and results-driven approach to investing one's social capital. And no doubt new charitable foundations rules and regulations, along with ongoing foundation legislation, will evolve in response to these new trends.

While it's great that a growing number of corporate and business leaders and thinkers are eager to make their marks in the philanthropic sandbox, it's also true that no one understands the real challenges of foundation grantmaking like those who have been toiling here for decades. That's why it's so critical that foundation executives and trustees make their voices heard among state and national policy and law-making bodies. And one of the best places to do that is at Foundations on the Hill, March 16 and 17th.

It's still not too late to sign up. The more of us who visit the Hill, the louder our voice and the stronger our influence as our field grows and changes. Get the details on the SECF Foundations on the Hill webpage.

To add your name to the list, contact Helen Ishii, Director of Member and Government Affairs, Southeastern Council of Foundations, (404) 524-0911 or helen@secf.org.

See you in DC!

Overlooking Basics Leads to Scandal

Thursday, January 14, 2010 by Betsey Russell

I must confess I've derived some chuckles and a lot of incredulous head-shaking as I read news lately about the sole trustee of the New York-based Judith Rothschild Foundation who disappeared for several months and left 17 grantees without their promised grant checks, which totaled about $100,000.

You can get the details — which read almost like fiction — from articles in the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. But long story short, the foundation was created by the late Judith Rosthchild, a New York artist, to help share the story of her own work and foster new artists. She named her friend, Harvey S. Shipley Miller, as the sole trustee.

That would be mistake number one, wouldn't you agree? Aside from the ethical considerations of having a single trustee, we often talk hypothetically about what would happen if a key leader were "hit by a bus." According to Mr. Miller, who recently resurfaced, this wasn't far from the truth. He claims he was badly injured in a fall at his home months ago and has been unable to communicate all this time. If we take him at his word, then that's all the more reason to have a plan in place for communication for any grantmaking foundation, no matter what the size or scope.

Sounds like Mr. Miller would benefit from SECF's upcoming Essential Skills and Strategies for Grantmakers workshop. If he were to attend, he'd learn some of the basic ins and outs of foundation rules and regulations from seasoned veterans in the field — including key points on ethics and communications. He'd also get his hands on some valuable philanthropy resources that would definitely inform his grantmaking.

He can't attend, but you certainly can! The two-day workshop takes place in Atlanta March 3-4. Click here to learn more, view the full syllabus and register.

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.

Keep Charitable Deduction Issue Fresh for Policymakers

Tuesday, November 3, 2009 by Mike Howland

When foundations descended on Capitol Hill March 25th for the annual Foundations On The Hill visits, the major issue preoccupying foundation executives and trustees was the Obama Administration proposal to limit the deduction for charitable contributions by wealthy individuals. Many were surprised that the first major initiative emerging from an Obama presidency presumed (because of the President's previous experience with foundations and non-profits) to be pro-philanthropy was a seeming strike against charity and apple pie. How could we contemplate any move that might deter contributions to food banks and homeless shelters with unemployment and foreclosure rates escalating rapidly?

The Senators and Representatives with whom the Southeastern Council of Foundations delegation met were quick to reassure us that they felt the proposal defied logic as well. Their reaction at the time was bipartisan and virtually unanimous against the proposal.

In the ensuing months, the non-profit sector--or at least much of it--has championed the notion that capping the deduction for charitable donations is a recipe for poor public policy. Myriad umbrella groups, including the Council of Foundations, American Society of Association Executives and Association of Fundraising Professionals, petitioned Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus with a cogent, collaborative letter urging preservation of the deduction. It has been terrific to see non-profit and philanthropic infrastructure groups unite and, for the most part, speak with one strong voice.

However, there is a danger of the voice of philanthropy being muffled in the larger debate over health care reform to which the limit on deductions has been--at least so far--inextricably linked. And, let's face it, health care reform is sufficiently important that it should dominate the airwaves. But, if the charitable deduction limitation becomes law as a tradeoff for changes in our national health care system, let it not transpire because philanthropy neglected to weigh in forcefully one more time before the vote.

The importance of non-profit infrastructure groups weighing in on this issue cannot be overstated. However, there's nothing more compelling than individual grantmaking foundations and charities articulating poignantly how such a limit on deductions may inhibit the capacity to serve people in the policymaker's own backyard.

Paint the picture, and send it in today!

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.

Rural Policy, Philanthropy Must Go Hand-In-Hand

Monday, October 26, 2009 by Betsey Russell

In an article last week in the online rural newspaper, The Daily Yonder, Karl Stauber, president of the Danville Regional Foundation, writes an open letter to President Obama, calling on him not to leave rural communities out of the mix as he looks for ways to provide new hope and a future for America.

A former USDA under-secretary, Stauber suggests five ways in which rural communities should be part of the policy mix, including a call for the creation of a Rural Civil Rights Act. He writes:

"People living in rural communities and regions should not be denied opportunities because of their location status. There about 50 million people living in rural America. If rural were a catgory like "race or ethnicity,” it would include more people than "Hispanic" or "African-American." Separate and un-equal should not be tolerated for any group. Access to opportunity should be a right, not an accident of locale. "

In this case, the "separate and un-equal" comes from blanket federal policies that are designed more for urban areas with the occasional rural afterthought. What Stauber calls for is a federal policy that allows rural areas to use federal investments in ways that are more suited to their unique environments and situations. That makes sense to me. I can't imagine that a policy that creates jobs and opportunity in Atlanta would derive the same benefit in Pineola, NC — or that what works in a southeastern mountain community would also work as well in the southwestern desert. The cultures, traditions, challenges and resources make for different worlds.

Stauber is writing specifically about federal government policy, but we all know that philanthropy has a huge role to play as well. I would suggest that philanthropic resources are the most important assets to engage in rural communities. There's no better vehicle for taking some risks, asking some difficult questions, and spurring community engagement. Just imagine what might happen if there were a community foundation or a private foundation serving even half of our country's rural communities. These foundation's wouldn't need to be housed in a rural area, but just have a foundation trustee or two who could interpret the needs and impact of grantmaking on the rural area and the urban centers it feeds.

True, foundations can't do it all or do it alone — and although there have been many laudable efforts to increase philanthropy in rural areas over the past two decades, we've still got a long way to go. But let's not throw in the towel. Even though their economies are shrinking, rural areas still have a role to play in our overall economy and the well being of our country — especially here in the South.

So Much to Talk About

Wednesday, October 7, 2009 by Betsey Russell

With as fast as the world of philanthropy is changing, it's sometimes hard to keep up. Private foundation legislation about payouts morphs into new rules for community foundations about funding advocacy groups. Corporate philanthropy's impact on brands runs together in my head with arguments about perpetuity and why people set up a foundation in the first place.

For years, the Southeastern Council of Foundations has been a haven for all manner of philanthropic conversations to take place, and now, I'm proud to see this organization taking the conversation one step farther. In this new blog, you'll find posts about a variety of topics from a number of authors about foundation rules, philanthropic policy, key issues for foundation trustees, worthy stories of grantmaking from around the region, news, useful ideas, and more.

But this blog is only a means to get the conversation started, so read often, share your thoughts frequently, and help us all raise the voice and vision of philanthropy further into our collective consciousness.

There's so much to talk about!

Who Defines How Foundations Should Change?

Tuesday, October 6, 2009 by Mike Howland

There's no shortage of opinion these days about what foundations should do differently to support nonprofits, which groups they should be funding, and how much they ought to pay out in grants. The commentary ranges from deeply insightful and soul-searching to borderline ludicrous.

This is not an environment that grantmakers have seen before. And while the chorus of columnists and policy wonks is full of suggestions (and in some cases, threats), the reality is that foundation trustees of private foundations, independent foundations, community foundation and corporate philanthropy have to make their own decisions about how to adapt to, and continue to add value in, a changed world.

It's not an "ain't nobody's business if I do," situation. Rather we should acknowledge that philanthropy is - and always has been - a personal thing.

I understand this completely, because the Southeastern Council of Foundations, as an association, has had to do the same thing. We recently launched our new strategic plan, and it paints a very new picture of our organization. Our strategic planning committee had to grapple with some tough issues about our relevancy to members and the value we provided. With their guidance, we came out of that discussion on the right path.

Just like our foundation members, we know we can't continue "business as usual," so we've made some changes. We've become more focused on building leadership in the sector, allowing our members to customize their relationship with us and with one another to a more detailed degree. We're also working strategically with other grantmaker organizations as partners.

Simply put, we're giving our members more ways to connect and more to connect to as they make very personal decisions about their grantmaking and their futures.

Luckily for us, the personal and professional relationships that members gain through SECF have retained - and even increased - their value during tough times. Connections, communications and camaraderie are valuable tools when one is struggling with touch choices. SECF is honored to provide those tools.

So, to all of you in the foundation community, I say: Only you can make the decisions about your foundation's operations and future. Don't let anyone tell you any differently. But don't make those decisions in a vacuum. Let your colleagues and friends at SECF know what we can do to help.

And on the same note, I know that growth and change are never really "complete," so I invite you all to take a look at our strategic plan and let us know what you think.

Michael R. Howland, CAE
President and CEO
Southeastern Council of Foundations