Having skimmed the grantee applications several times as they were coming in, I wasn’t thinking about which of them I would choose at those moments, instead I was confident in the fact that there would be a wide array of applications and that the selection process will be relatively simple. Meeting with our groups in class to discuss our core values, their intersections, and the types of organizations that we will be giving to was also very helpful and left me feeling that my principles would allow for a very simple and quick choosing process.
When I sat down to read thoroughly through all of the applicants I faced some serious internal debates. Were the issues we were addressing the most prominent? Am i biased in choosing one focus group over another, or one organization over another? Are we really making an impact, and working to eliminate an issue? What makes one organization more worthy of our money verses another?
Extremely torn, I read through the whole list completely still not knowing where I stand, however recalling our group discussion helped me out a bit. We ended up focusing on youth related and educational causes as a tactic of preparing kids for the real world, aiding them when they are in need, and eliminating a lot of other issues by addressing them early on and helping children develop habits and lifestyles that would prevent other problems.
As during the last group presentation my team presented on the issue of education, I knew that graduation rates in Broome County were higher than the state average, and that class sizes were relatively smaller than the average as well. However, these were not the issues that we are trying to address this time around. The numbers of children living in poverty or facing disenfranchisement are tremendous, and are the real issue. If these youths do not have any support system, the county ends up raising people that are not built to succeed and are, in fact, constantly brought down. The youths are less likely to pursue a higher education, therefore find a better paying job, are more likely to resort to criminality ending up incarcerated or impoverished.
Our goals became childhood and youth development because of the long-term prospects we saw in addressing these issues. After recalling our conversations, I felt way more confident in choosing the non-profits I found the most productive and promising.
Of course, all of the decisions we make are biased, so I am certain that specific experiences of mine drove me to pursue this issue, but they also allow me to constructively evaluate the necessity and potential success of an organization of this nature.
When meeting with my group again, I think that we achieved our goals to address a prominent and relatively urgent issue within the Broome County community through giving to an organization that is realistic with its goals, hopes to achieve them through a needed outlet, is working to eliminate issues long-term rather than just alleviate them short-term, and is transparent about their finances and execution model.
Great post, Sofia. As a member of your group I agree that our discussion about our values and criteria really helped me in choosing the organizations that I want to prioritize. I had felt fairly certain of my values in education and poverty going into the process and was excited that many members of our group had similar ideas. A new decision-making concept for me that you mention in your post, and one that I have come to view as extremely important in this process, is transparency.
ReplyDeleteWhen initially sorting through the grant applicants, I was attracted to the organizations that laid out an exact dollar amount and said exactly what they need it for. For example, Rescue Mission requested $3,000 for two donation bins. Rescue Mission’s specific goal made me feel comfortable and secure with the idea of donating to them. The donation bins are a very reasonable and highly functional asset for the organization to have. I was shocked that other organizations requested money for things like iPads and Bingo machines, things that in my eyes did not qualify as necessities worth funding.
Beyond providing us with a set goal, Rescue Mission even requested a specific amount of money. I really respected this. With the knowledge that Rescue Mission needs $3,000, we can comfortably divide our other money elsewhere if we choose to. This post is not meant to advocate for Rescue Mission, but rather to commend their honesty and reasonableness in this process. Rescue Mission demonstrates a kind of transparency that I would like to see from more of our applicants.
Zimmerman Lehman, an organization that guides and helps nonprofits, defines transparency as “how much you tell the public about your agency, and how honestly and quickly you reveal this information” (http://www.zimmerman-lehman.com/accountabilityandtransp.htm). The most effective ways to achieve transparency, according to Zimmerman Lehman, are the IRS Form 990 return and annual or bi-annual newsletters. Newsletters open the organization up to the public and display honesty and progress updates that cannot be found elsewhere.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals provides an incredible newsletter, which can be found here: http://www.charityemailgallery.com/newsletter/rscpa-were-making-plans-have-your-say/#.VRF6mvnF9Fy. It includes news, contact info, goals for the future, and a “pet of the month” just for fun. This helps the organization communicate its achievements and goals to the public and creates a sense of trust.
Newsletters that are inconsistent or unhelpful give the public reason to have less faith in an organization. If an organization does not achieve what its newsletter promises, perhaps that organization has poor planning or budgeting ability. If an organization cannot share goals for the future in a newsletter, how can potential donators make an educated decision on where to spend their money?
To honor the importance of transparency, I think it would be worthwhile for the class to spend time on the websites of our finalist organizations, specifically searching for newsletters or similar informational outlets. The organizations that share the most and that consistently complete projects and begin new ones are, in my opinion, the ones we can trust to use the grant money for noble and productive causes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSofia, I really understand your struggle with balancing responsibility over bias when choosing an organization to fund. I agree with your observations and it's true, we all have biases, and its difficult, if not impossible, to completely separate ourselves from them. One of the nice things that I have experienced from working on a "team" is that a lot of my bias is leveled-out from listening to other students make the case for their picks (which naturally are influenced by their biased perspective). So, working on a committee has really been helpful especially since my classmates have been really thoughtful and open-minded throughout the process, giving everyone ample time to express their thoughts.
ReplyDeleteIt so sad to imagine a helpless child or a child who is exposed to the evils of poverty. It is even more depressing to watch those children fall from society into the realm of socio-economic disenfranchisement. That course seems to be a one-way street and rarely does anyone seem to escape once they are pulled under. I applaud your interest in education and early childhood intervention programs. Without REAL economic opportunity I fear that all other efforts are fruitless - in terms of revitalizing this area. We can prepare children for the world but if the local "world" looks more like a developing nation than the richest country in the world, like many regions of of nation look, then what are we really preparing them for? We could train the greatest math and science brains on the planet and at this point, unless they moved to some other area, those brains would be either "un" or "under" employed staying here. I agree, however, that education and prevention programs are very important. I just want to emphasize the need for opportunity. There are great national efforts to stimulate entrepreneurship and small business development. The organization leading the fight in this arena is the Kaufman Foundation. I encourage everyone to check them out at: http://www.kauffman.org/what-we-do/entrepreneurship
I really enjoyed your post, Thank You!
Sofia,
ReplyDeleteHaving read your blog post, I think your approach to focusing on how to choose the finalist organizations was very interesting. Personally, I was very underwhelmed by most of the applicants – I was hoping there would be more of a focus on our grant money going to fund a direct need rather than a subset of the organization itself. Like Brittany said, the overwhelming number of organizations that said they would be using the grant money for something that most of us wouldn’t consider as directly impactful – such as iPads or a bingo machine – astonished me.
I was also turned off by how many organizations said they would be using the money for something like fundraising or creating a website or Facebook page. It is easy enough to create a free website that is predesigned, with no coding necessary, and if an organization can’t create a viable Facebook page in 10 minutes or so, I’m not sure I want to put my trust in them anyways. Going into this process, I had several organizations in mind that I knew the basic purpose of and felt sure that I would like to give money to. I thought I would be having an extremely hard time choosing between the organizations I felt a strong affinity for, and that I would be fighting heartily for the ones I liked. However, the response on the application that wound up influencing me the most was the one where the organizations told us what exactly they would be using the grant for. For our purposes, it matters more where the money is going; personally, I’m not thrilled with the prospect of giving thousands of dollars away so a group can advertise better. I want to feel like our donation has more of a direct impact, and like my group chose for one of our values, I think need versus want is a very big factor in my decision making. I want our money to go to an organization that needs it, and will use the money for something that they can’t go without.
I found it funny that through the whole first half of the class, I argued fervently for the heart side of the head versus heart argument, and now that we have actually gotten the chance to look through the applications, I’ve had a much more rational approach than I expected to. Although there are organizations I love for their general purpose, such as Make-A-Wish, I don’t feel thrilled that they told us they would use the grant money for something I feel is unnecessary. I actually feel like I’m going to have a much harder time arguing for the organizations I want, because in almost every case, I don’t really feel passionate about the organization itself. I seem to feel as if they are simply the best options from a variety of throwaways. Also strange to me was that there were some organizations I absolutely did not like the overall purpose of, but I felt that what they wanted to put the money towards was better or more effectual than some of the organizations I really liked.
Hi Sofia!
ReplyDeleteI can definitely understand your trepidation at beginning the selection process, because I experienced the same feeling. I went into the evaluation thinking that I knew exactly the kind of organization I was looking for, but it quickly turned out to be more of an undertaking than I had expected. Some organizations that I expected to love didn't end up standing out to me, and vice versa. I was forced to reevaluate my goals for this course just as I was evaluating each applicant.
I also agree with your statements that the group project helped you narrow down your core values for philanthropy, at least as far as these organizations are concerned. In my experience with my group, I found it really beneficial to talk about and compare what we valued and how it applied to choosing our finalists. We all discovered that, while we naturally had some differences, we also had many similar goals and dreams about the effect we can make with our grant. I think both your experience and mine really illustrate that our class has great potential to make a difference in this community, and I hope it gave you as much faith in us as a class as it did to me.
I think our recent group work can also tie in with your initial string of questions, i.e. why certain organizations deserve the money more than others, are we making a difference, etc. Many of us, myself included, have begun to see this course as a stepping stone in our philanthropic paths. I know I will apply the knowledge I've gained here to my actions in years to come, and may even donate to one of the organizations that applied and perhaps will not end up with the grant. Perhaps doing the same may help ease your mind about the difference you are making, too.
Great reflective post Sofia. I'd definitely have to agree with Hannah on how your feelings about an organization can change after you bring it up to a group to debate about. For my group's process we went on our own to the organization list and looked at what stood out to us personally, though we decided in class that we all had an interest in issues pertaining to education. Most of the charities we brought up had to deal with the education factor, but sometimes some of my team members asked us to look at charities that were unrelated to the overall focus. But, as we further developed what issues we really wanted to focus on and what common values we all had, our view of some organizations changed both positively and negatively. I had some attachments to certain charities based on what I personally felt was important but once they were brought up to the group for further analysis, we all found that it probably wasn't the best option. An interesting example of this is Family Planning. I really liked the organization when I read about it on my own and found that another group member shared interest in it as well. But once the group began discussing it, we found some flaws like the fact that it was located in another county and we were a bit put off by that fact because it seemed like their Binghamton location was fine and they just wanted to help out a separate location from the community that we were targeting. However, in class, Family Planning was brought up by two groups and I was actually quite surprised to hear their interpretation of the location "situation". It was very interesting and eye-opening to see that our group simply misunderstood Family Planning's application and it certainly made me support the charity more in the sense that their issue of not receiving funding because of their location was put into action by our group's decision not to endorse them because of that very reason. I think that experience was what I most took away from the whole group process of filing down finalists; everyone has different values and sees and experiences things differently. This taught me that, as a class, we should really strive for listening to everyone's opinion and hearing a bunch of different perspectives because that can make all the difference in picking the kinds of charities that we want to support with our grant.
ReplyDeleteHi Sofia,
ReplyDeleteInteresting internal struggle, though frustrating, I think these conflicts are vital to the process. If it were easy, everyone would be doing it. My group faced many of the same issues. We eliminated one organization from our pool of finalists simply because there was no way for people to get there via public transportation. My group ended up picking a wide array of finalists. However, I am in your camp. I think it's essential for the youth of this community to get a leg up. My choice for one of the finalists in my group was the Citizen U program facilitated by Cornell. Many of my group members questioned my decision. They believed that the group really didn't need the money, and admittedly, yes, the group probably does not urgently need the money, but I am willing to overlook the fact that the program might indeed be bankrolled because it isn't the program asking for money, it's the kids that are part of it. Citizen U is modeled after our class and they are doing many of the same tasks we are. Now imagine weighing in on such important issues at 14 like we are today when we are 20. I only wish I had had that experience. The money would be used by a board led by youth to address issues in Binghamton. This is no longer about teaching a man to fish, I think, if anything, they would be teaching us. The improvements would be by the people for the people. It is truly an irreplaceable feeling and above all a sense of empowerment that can't rival other donations.
We all bring a certain bias to this process. Eliminating our bias would require a suppression of our experiences and to a degree I think it would be helpful, but on another level we need to bring our bias to the table. Bias allows us o empathize with certain causes. No matter what organizations we end up choosing, we wont solve all the problems in this county nor will any of these have a snowball effect, but at the very least we have made one life (or lives) breath easier.