A Tangent Regarding Intent and Result with OLPC and Pornhub

        As we close in on the end of the course and prepare to vote, I'd like to make a change of pace with my post this week: Revisiting a topic we discussed earlier in the semester: The importance, or lack of importance, of intent.

        One of the first videos we discussed in class was a segment from The Daily Show where Samantha Bee shed light upon the hypocrisy of an oil company painting fracking drill-bits pink and donating 100 thousand dollars to the Susan G. Komen foundation. At the conclusion of our debates, we had never reached a unifying consensus on the issue. A large number of us argued that money is money and the company's ulterior motives weigh little into the fact that a donation was being made. The rest held that philanthropy is more than just giving out handouts, a donors intention is just as if not more important.

        3 years ago, the pornographic video site, Pornhub, underwent a several philanthropic campaigns. The company intended to raise breast cancer awareness by offering free breast exams and donating money for every view on specific categories of films. At the end of their month of campaigning, their videos had ammassed over 74 million views. However, when the organization offered their donation to the Susan G. Komen Foundation, it was rejected. In response, the website tripled the donation and split the money amongst several other charities. Did the Susan G. Komen Foundation make the right decision? If the foundation's mission was to raise awareness for breast cancer and work towards a cure, how does millions of views and thousands of dollars not work towards that goal? Does Pornhub's subjectively moral questionability matter at all? Does it matter that Pornhub gained a lot of positive press and attention as well as visits to their website?

        In a past tweet, I mentioned how the One Laptop per Child Foundation worked to bring technology to impoverished children to empower self education and learning augmented by the power of connectivity, and computing. Their most famous initiative was dubbed "Give One Get One". G1G1 allowed people to obtain one of their laptops by buying two machines: One for the purchaser, and one that would be sent to a child in a developing nation. The program was widely lauded and successful, or so it seemed at first. After years of the program, investigators uncovered an uncomfortable truth. A large portion of the computers sent abroad were popping up on grey markets like ebay. The recipients of the laptops, or their parents, held their monetary value over their educational one and were selling them online. OLPC had a mission of improving education in third world countries by utilizing the power of technology, but instead, their efforts fell through: The G1G1 program ended soon after.

        These contrasting examples of philanthropy are intended to make you question the importance of intent again. Would you rather give to an organization with good motives and lackluster results, or would you give to one with questionable or more ambiguous motives but concrete numbers to show their effectiveness? Are donors to G1G1 at fault for failing to foresee the program's side effects? Do your current thoughts regarding the "Pink Fracking" video match with your original impressions?

        I hope that this tangent from the normal blog posts is a nice departure to what may sometimes feel like more of a fight for one's opinions as opposed to being about philanthropy itself. No matter what our final decision is, I don't think anyone can say they haven't left with a new understanding of the entire concept of giving and we should remember that more than our vote.

Expectations vs Reality: What have we really learned?

As this process is coming to a close, I'm am left wondering what I truly learned from this process and the class as a whole. Did we learn to become generous, caring people? Did we learn to focus that generosity to make effective change? How did we learn this?

When deciding if a class or lesson was meaningful, I try to deduce whether the class taught me facts and information or if it changed my perspective. Obviously, this class was able to do both very effectively. We all know a bit better how to filter through unworthy organizations to find those that deserve our philanthropy. In addition, the first half of the class was able to change our mindset(s) on the very definition of philanthropy and everything it entails. My issue is about how to merge those very important lessons into this current process; has the group aspect of the process whitewashed all the personal changes we've experienced?

For the first half of this class, I had started to question many of my values and their respective importances. "Why do I stand by this value?" "How does this value align with my core self?" "Why does this value even matter?" I also kept asking myself what the point of all of this was. Why did any of it even matter to my life? There were so many personal dilemmas that I couldn't solve at that time. By now, I had expected to find myself closer to some resolutions of those introspective questions. I must say that I had completely forgot about those vital questions until I started writing this very blog post. I question what the presupposed goals of this process were and what actually will come of them.

I anticipated that the point of the process was to become more firm in our values in order to defend our choices. We were taught how to better communicate our values, but I don't feel that has been needed. In theory, it seems that it should have been necessary, and maybe it was for some, but I feel it has not been an important factor. After all, values are completely personal and subjective, and there's no way to logically deduce that your values are better than all others. Then I ask: Why emphasize the importance of personal values if this entire process is about compromising and forfeiting values? At this point there seems to be a dichotomy between group giving and personal giving.

With group giving, values become arbitrary by the very nature of collective decision making. There are two scenarios: 1) Everyone has the same exact values, which leads to the ability to make a decision based solely logistical choices or 2) People disagree on values and make compromises to find a middle ground. It still seems like personal values in choice 2 are still important, but I'd argue that core values are heavily tied to one another, which are then tied to the individual's mindset as a whole. The collective "mindset" becomes unique from the mindsets of each individual. At that point I'd say that everyone's values are compromised in some way, which leads to no one feeling attached to the filtered choices. The best course of action should then become to just find the most logical decision. In either case of 1 or 2, the decision becomes based on logic, but with choice 2, the emotional aspect becomes moot.

To bring it back to this process, I don't think there's a single person who is entirely satisfied with the outcome so far. No one's personal values dictate that these were the best choices, so no person feels emotionally attached to whatever decision will be made. Well then I'll ask: Why didn't we just choose from the start the organizations that have the objectively biggest impact using facts and data? What was the point of using values and emotions to filter out organizations when none of us are emotionally satisfied with the outcome? Can you say that this process has made you more confident in your values, or would you say that this process has taught you to become detached from your values?

A Reflection

Hello everyone!

So I'm going to be honest; I'm really not sure what to write about this week. Sure, I could spew a bunch of facts about Family Planning to you guys but, truthfully, I'm tired. I've come to the realization that fighting for what you believe in can be quite draining sometimes; I don't feel defeated but I do feel a bit deflated, if that makes any sense. To clarify, I do have a strong connection with Family Planning: through my research I see a need in the Broome County community for what they are trying to accomplish and I believe both in women's rights and the importance of access to certain reproductive health care services for everyone, regardless of income. However, I do believe there is a difference between a connection to a charity's mission and an emotional connection to the charity itself. I don't believe that I have super strong emotional ties to Family Planning, and if it seems that way, I feel the need to apologize for that. I would hope that we could all separate our emotions from our task at hand, which is to provide up to 3 of 5, all equally deserving, non-profits with a reasonably sized grant. I'm normally very quiet in class, but I decided to out-rightly support Family Planning because I believe in its mission and what it is doing for the community, but that does absolutely not mean that I don't support other charities and want them to "lose".

I feel a little bit confined to what group I was placed in and it honestly sucks that I couldn't go do site visits for each charity, but that was just not feasible with the time-frame we were given, transportation issues, and with scheduling, as I'm sure everyone else would agree. Last Thursday we were asked to discuss what we feel we can all do to learn more about the finalists and do so in a way that isn't super combative or too personal. One of my suggestions was that everyone should strive to do their own research, outside of class, on each of the finalists instead of expecting or waiting for all of the information to come from the representative group. Yes, each group supports a specific charity and is in charge of relaying their site visit experience, but for this week, as we narrow down our 5 to a 1, 2, and/or 3, we should also try to answer our own questions and share that information with each other; we should help one another be as informed as we all can possibly be so that our final decision is effective and ultimately a joint decision. I know it is completely impossible for everyone to be totally satisfied with the outcome, but maybe if we all put in the effort together, we'll at least make wise choices. I know that I'm still continuing to do as much research as I can, not just on Family Planning, but on all of the charities so that I can definitively support who should be our final non-profits; I hope everyone in class will join me.

After reflecting on my own experience so far, my questions to all of you are: how is everybody feeling with this process? What do you find to be the hardest part of making such a big decision in a very specific time-frame?And finally, what are some questions you still have about a certain charity? Maybe we can all help each other clarify and learn in the comments or at least see what our classmates are thinking about and hopefully address them in class.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and I hope you all have a great week!

Public Relations and its connection to philanthropy

For my blog post this week, I am choosing to discuss a topic I find of great importance for both our class and for my future career. I have talked quite a bit in class about how excited I am to be pursuing a career in Public Relations. Therefore, I thought I would try to find some connections between philanthropy and Public Relations and how they interconnect, both in positive and negative ways.

Let's start with the positive aspect of how these two important ideas feed off of one another. Good Public Relations strategies help a non-profit/philanthropic cause shine. Think for a moment about our top 5 contenders that we as a class selected. How did each organization convince us that their causes are the most worthy out of the 50+ options we were allowed to choose from? One might argue that we had our individual biases about which organizations we wanted to choose, however, I am going to argue that the groups we chose all had a convincing story to tell. This is esentially what PR is there for: telling a story, making people believe that your cause, event, candidate, etc. should be on your radar of importance. 

The other side of this interconnection that is not so wonderful is this idea of "corporate philanthropy." A simple way to describe corporate philanthropy is when companies get involved in some sort of act of philanthropy to be in the media/public eye's good graces. This to me is a bit concerning. We have been discussing a lot in class, particularly towards the beginning of the semester, about the power of intent. I have been battling this question in my head as we have continued the semester, and even writing this blog post entry. As someone who is about to have two years of specific training in PR tactics such as understanding audience and social media analytics, I can't help but wonder if this corporate philanthropy is causing more harm than good.

The undeniable truth is the in order for companies to continue making profits, they need to uphold their reputation and the best strategy is by implementing acts of kindness and philanthropy. For one of my tweets of the week, I shared this link that gives a much more vivid breakdown of how Public Relations employees look at the value of added philanthropy. According to this site, philanthropic giving by companies does make an actual difference. It was also interesting to see that certain types of philanthropic causes generate more heightened media attention such as education, community development/housing, healthcare and children.

Here's my personal take, a resolution (or compromise) on how to make philanthropy come from the heart while benefitting companies and their repuations. What if companies actually went out into the community more instead of just writing a check? What if employees were required as part of their training/initial orientation to learn about the value of philanthropy or at least have a better understanding of the philanthropy their company supports and why that organization is essential to the greater good of the community? This article gives some excellent suggestions instead of just taking the easy way out with a signature on a check.

I would love to hear your thoughts!

Clarification on Mom's House

Hello everyone! This is just an additional post to amend the error about fundraising that was made in my group's Mom’s House presentation.
So Charity Navigator uses two calculations that focus on fundraising (described here in detail).

            The first is “Fundraising Expenses.” This is the percentage spent on fundraising compared to the total expenses of the organization. In 2012, the total expenses were $269,898 and the fundraising expenses were $31,278. This would mean that 11.6% of expenses went towards fundraising. This is considered to be very good by Charity Navigator’s standards (if you would like to see more detailed scores for different types of nonprofits, check it out here).

            The second measure is “Fundraising Efficiency,” which is the amount of money an organization spends to generate a $1 of donation. Here’s where it gets a little confusing on the Form 990, but after talking to Prof. Campbell today during his office hours this is what I found.

           “Gross income from fundraising events” = $84,304

           “All other contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts” = $137,379

            Therefore, total fundraising earnings before expenses = $221,683

            “Total fundraising expenses” = $31,278

This doesn’t include government contributions. It does include fundraising “events” like candy or flower orders. So, the fundraising efficiency comes out to be $0.141, which means that Mom’s House spends 14.1¢ to raise $1.00, making a 85.9¢ profit. This is considered somewhere between average to very good by Charity Navigator’s standards, which you can see in the link above.

Clarification on Rescue Mission

(Note: this is meant to be a blog 'comment' but I have posted it as a 'post' to increase visibility) 

Dr. Campbell and some other students in the class expressed confusion as to the religious nature of the Rescue Mission. I would like to clarify on that:

Yes, the Rescue Mission is a Christian organization.

No, the Rescue Mission does not force residents of their shelters to attend Christian religious services. The only thing that the Rescue Mission does encourage is that residents volunteer in various events in order to give back to the community, just as the community is giving to them.

Many people in the class have also expressed concern over the need for donation bins when the Thrifty Shopper is capable of receiving donations itself. The simple answer behind that is what Kyle pointed out multiple times during our presentation yesterday: the Rescue Mission knows how to run a business. When trying to grow and expand a business, it is important to capitalize on new markets. I believe someone (I apologize for not remembering whom) yesterday made the comment that if people really wanted to donate clothes, they could just drive to the Thrifty Shopper instead of going to a bin. While that may be true, the purpose of the bins is to attack people in new markets who do not really want to donate clothes. They are searching for the market of people who have clothes to donate, but have not yet donated because of a lack of convenience.

Though the argument can be made that I am comparing apples to oranges, the Rescue Mission's need for donation bins is for the same reason that there are 367 McDonald's in NYC: to capitalize on new markets. Capitalizing on new markets in the Southern Tier will help the Rescue Mission to generate more revenue, allowing them to build a women's shelter and expand their services in the future.

As this topic seemed quite controversial in class, please reply with any arguments/concerns/comments that you have below. I think that it is great that so many people in our class can have differing opinions on our organizations, and I think that it really contributes to the process of learning how to work together as a group and decide on our final grantees. 

What I Am Looking Forward To

A lot of the posts recently have voiced how disappointed they are with the process we went through thus far. Although I feel the same way that the process could be improved, I want to look to the future and the last few weeks of class.

I am looking forward to group presentations this week the most. Like everyone else, I have my concerns about all of our finalists. I feel like we rushed the process and may have chosen prematurely before we had all of the facts like Jason said in his post. I hate to admit it, but I did have some questions and reservations about the Rescue Mission even though I volunteered to be their liaison. But all of my questions were answered when I went on the site visit. I feel like as a class, we only learned so much from the presentations from the organizations in class. Many of us may have left class with unanswered questions and unaddressed concerns. I think the site visit went so well because we were not limited to 20 minutes like we were in class and we could be immersed in the organization itself. It is obviously much different to be somewhere physically as opposed to pictures in a presentation. At our site visit, I got to learn how the Thrifty Shopper worked and most importantly, how our grant could make a difference.

I still have questions and concerns about our other four finalists, but I hope that they will be answered in this weeks finalist presentations. I think that we will all get a better idea about how our grant could make a difference. I know that many of us have also been questioning how successful these organizations are and if they are truly making a difference. I am hoping that these questions will be addressed as well this week, as we should not give to an organization that we feel isn’t worthy of a donation regardless of what their request is. We must be confident in their mission and how they are achieving it before anything. I just wish we had more time to determine if our finalists were worthy of a grant before we had to pick them.

I just want us to make the biggest difference that we are capable of with the $10,000 we were given. I am looking forward to the award ceremony where we give the money away during finals week. I am sure it will be so fulfilling to see the joy on the faces of the organization representatives. I think after all of the arguing is over, it will all be well worth it. I may be an optimist, but I believe we will all be happy in the end knowing that the money went to a worthy cause to help people who are in much greater need than we are. It will also be fulfilling knowing that we made a difference in our community, which I am sure is a core value for many of you, including myself.

What are you looking forward to?

I Think We Did This Backwards

I think we went through this entire process backwards. We sent out applications and got back just over 50 of them. Then, we more or less randomly decided on five finalist organizations based on which ones we thought sounded the best, or felt like they did good important work, or wrote really convincing applications. And now, we are stuck with 5 finalist organizations, which in my opinion and I am sure the opinions of many of my classmates, are not all viable options for donating our money to.

The first step should simply NOT have been to follow our hearts and pick organizations to be finalists without having done the same type of thorough research we have now conducted for these five finalists. If every student was assigned two organizations to research, make visits to, and give a brief presentation on whether or not those two organizations should be considered and why, we would not only be stuck with organizations we wish were never picked, but we would have been nearly guaranteed that the organizations who were finalists were worthy of our donations.

The decisions of who should be finalists should have been based purely on facts: management of funds, transparency, effectiveness in achieving their clearly stated mission statements etc. From there, we would have been able to asses which organizations were providing the most necessary services, asking for the most fair amounts of money, and perhaps even appealed to our sensibilities to determine our final grant recipients.

I'm certainly grateful for the tools and information I have gained from this class, and the hands on experience it has afforded me. I just feel I learned a lot more "what not to dos" than "what to dos." Which is totally fine, just maybe not what I was expecting.

Balancing Biases

As our site visit presentations approach, I have been think about how to balance my obligation to be the conveyor of facts for both the organization and class, without letting my own emotional biases interfere.  Fortunately, I felt as though the the site visit was very successful in providing me with a deeper understanding of The Rescue Missions goals and needs within this community. However, I am hoping that this broader understanding does not become debilitating when it comes to representing and choosing organizations.  While I saw tremendous value in the idea of a site visit, I personally could not help but think that their must be two main outcomes/ emotions that formulate as a result. In my opinion, I can see one either walking away impressed and pleased by what they witnessed or disappointed and underwhelmed. Of course these are not the only two reactions, it is just an assumption of what I believe to be common.

That being said, how does this affect our presentations and representations of the organizations? Through out class discussions we have come back to the idea that looking at facts and results are crucial in our decision making. But what happens when the facts do not match with the feelings we experienced in the site visit? What happens when you where blown away by the visit but the facts do not back it up enough (or visa versa). Even more so when we each were limited (mostly because of time and practicality) in how many site visits we could attend. Therefore, making it harder to avoid these possible biases or conflicting emotions, when they only exist strongly for one organization.

The "Mom's House" experience

When I was faced with the fact that none of the organizations that I recommended became finalists, I definitely felt discouraged. I thought I had great reasons why these organizations qualified for finalist spots, such as their outreach, impact, and urgency. I knew I still needed to be a functional part of the selection process and the class, so I chose a finalist organization with an open spot for the site visits and presentation and told myself to just pull through and give it my 100%.

I cannot emphasize enough how impressed I ended up being with Mom’s House. I had missed the class presentation the organization had given, so I was learning about their work for the first time during our visit there, other than for reading the information from their website.

The organization is completely free of reliance on government funding. I thought this was one of their strengths as well as definitely obstacles. This definitely allows them to be free of certain obligations, however fundraising is a challenge and the fact that they are able to do without government support is very impressive.

The program is effectively serving 30 children per year on average, even though they have a capacity of 40, however a lack of funding to afford enough staff to provide for 10 extra children.

I understand that getting such an idea started and developed with no fault is nearly impossible, which is why I admire the fact that Mom’s House is finally trying to obtain a set curriculum for their preschool class. They have always had teachers of great expertise teaching that age group, however all of the lessons were somewhat improvised based on the students’ needs and constant change within Mom’s House. Their primary goal is to provide help, but now they are finally at the stage of the program’s evolution where more attention is able to get paid towards having a consistent and concrete outline for teaching the kids and propelling their development.

The board model that Mom’s House has in place is also a very effective one. Because all of the members of the directorial board are local and diverse in their backgrounds Mom’s House is able to widen their horizons in terms of fundraising and community support. There are business owners, retired professionals, and religious leaders among the members, which allows for an outreach to a greater number of community members in telling them about Mom’s House and having their help in funding the project. The organization is able to have a lot of fundraising done with the help of local businesses through giving away a day’s proceeds or sales of some sort.

I am very happy to have learned a lot about this organization, and to be able to share it with the class because I truly believe in this organization’s success and efficient use of the funds there are asking the class for.

What did the process truly accomplish?

We are a little less than a month away before the semester ends. It's been an interesting process and an interesting class. In less than a month, I will walk away from this class having made a decision with a bunch of strangers that impacts a whole community. I get to graduate and say, “I made a difference”, but I leave this class questioning whether this class has truly made a profound difference for us as philanthropists.  

Over spring break I returned home to New York City. The familiar skyline and murky air greeted me. Blaring sirens, rude pedestrians, and dancing kids in subway cars engulfed me once again. I was home. However, to most New Yorkers, including myself, the need in New York confronts us every day on our daily commute. One city block can make a world of a difference. You can walk from one of the richest parts of the city into one of the poorest, without giving it much thought. I saw beggars beg and starving artist perform their craft in exchange for a few dollars. I saw kids dance in the subway, then narrowly escape cops who tried to arrest them. I saw all these things unfold before me and just like every other time, they made me uneasy and angry, but just like everyone around me, I did nothing. I knew better, but I didn’t do the “right” thing. In the same way that I ignored the need in New York, I believe we ignored the time once must dedicate to philanthropy.

In many ways, though democratic, I felt that we rushed our decision in picking organizations. I completely understand that we are constrained by time, but for a class that values time so much, perhaps we should of devoted a bit more of our own. I guess my point overall is whether the process merely facilitated the donating part of the program, but failed to cultivate/foster the philanthropist culture. Amanda put up a good fight in order to up the total number of organizations we wanted to consider, but most people, including myself, wanted the deliberation to be over quickly. We chose some organizations based on impulse and emotions, rather than calculated assessments. We were instructed to consider financial health a factor, but not the most important. We, as a class, were far more concerned with impact, but again, I ask, what good is the impact of an organization if we chose out of haste, instead of true need.

I don’t believe any of the organizations we picked are bad organizations, but perhaps they might have not deserved to be there, perhaps it is the case that we missed out on picking a better organization in a rush to do “good”. Did we compromise our philanthropic values?

A Daunting Choice

It's a little bit strange to think that we are so close to the end of our semester. It feels like we just began our hypothetical discussion of how to best give and what giving really means for us individually and collectively as a society. But now with only three weeks left of classes we have to turn our months worth of hypothetical questions and answers into reality. We have chosen five amazing organizations, all of whom do great work for this community. There is not question that all of these organizations and the 50 others we passed over are deserving of this money. But now we are faced with the daunting decision of how we choose. As we scrutinize each organization we should leave our emotions aside and decide based solely on fact, need and our individual subjective assessments of the organizations. I look forward to hearing about each individual sight visit because I think it will give us more of a full picture of each organization and the work it accomplishes.

I have to admit I am already a little bit nervous about the organizations we choose to be in our finalists. In theory and maybe even in practice they are all great organization, but I can't help looking at the downfalls they each possess. For example Kopernic, a great organization that fosters the love for science into local youth does great work. But will a new imaging system really help them get closer to achieving their mission. Furthermore, should we give money to them just because we know our grant will be matched. I believe that while making our decision we should leave not consider  the fact that the money we could give would be matched. This fact has been mentioned various times during class discussion, and though it is great that our small grant could help acquire them an even larger one, it has no baring on the merit of their request.

We can then look to Family Planning, a great organization that provides essential medical care to those who would not otherwise be able to afford it. However, is a clinic that is only open once a week really in need on $10,000 in repairs.

Does the Southern Tier Alternative Therapies require that we pay for each child to receive a new IPad, or is their a more cost effective route that would allow for the same outcome?

Should we support an organization that requires its recipients to attend and participate in Christian services when there is little to no other option for men of lets say a Jewish or Muslim faith?

These are the questions that I cannot help but ask myself. I know that in the end we will make the right choice. But I am anxious to find out how we will make that choice.

The Castle

This Saturday, I was really excited to hear that Binghamton University has taken on stewardship of The Castle, formerly known as the Inebriate Asylum (read the full story here http://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/local/2015/04/10/details-emerge-bu-stewardship-castle/25592067/). It was built in 1858, when it became the first institution in the USA to treat alcoholism as a medical condition. Unfortunately, it's been vacant for 22 years. I mentioned this historical site in a comment a few weeks ago, and ever since I first heard of it I've been absolutely fascinated. I had no idea that a beautiful building like this even existed, or that it's located a mere 14 minutes from our campus. I was thrilled to hear that BU has taken it on, it makes me feel proud to be a Bearcat. 
The university is really excited about The Castle, although they don't have any specific plans yet. I can imagine it as a hub for cool new businesses, which would get tax benefits for being on the site. What can you see in The Castle's future? A community center? Restaurants? Classrooms?
I'm curious to see what kind of a role philanthropy will play in these plans. So far it seems that the University is relying solely on $12.5 million of state funds. Although our class has certainly favored social organizations rather than SOBs, I think funding a place like The Castle would be just as important. It has so much potential to improve the community and make Binghamton a better place to live, somewhere to really be proud of. That's why I think it's really important for us to consider funding Kopernik. Anything that attracts people to Binghamton is good for the community as a whole.
The community needs places like this to keep it alive. I know because my hometown is pretty dead. There's almost nothing to do there, and i wish we had someplace like Kopernik. However, when I was home for spring break I was really excited to hear about the efforts of a local music hall, which holds concerts and other community events. They just started renovations on a new music reading room. They need money for repairs, so they're asking everyone in the community to make a donation, even if it's only a few dollars. So far, the community really seems to be rallying around this cause. People like having something to work towards, together. I hope that if the University decides to collect donations, they will harness this collective spirit of community giving.

Tweet of the Week Donation (and disclaimer of possible conflict of interest)

During the first week of March, I was fortunate enough to win the Tweet of the Week contest with my tweet, "F*** the poor." This provocative video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBuC_0-d-9Y for anyone who wants to rewatch it) explored people's reactions to different stimuli. Many people were quite upset when a man carried a sign that said "F*** the poor," but almost no one could be bothered to donate when the sign said "Help the poor," and the man asked for donations. It showed how people could be aware of a problem, yet ignore it when it requires their help. 

By winning the contest, I received $87.00 to donate to a charity. I chose to donate to an organization from my hometown, Syracuse, that has expanded to other locations in Upstate New York, including Binghamton. Interestingly enough, the organization I chose, the Rescue Mission, applied for the Learning by Giving grant and has been chosen as a finalist by the class. 

I have been involved with the Rescue Mission since I was young. Having no younger brothers, when I grew out of my clothes, I donated them to the Rescue Mission for distribution to the impoverished or sale in their Thrifty Shopper stores. I have also cooked and served meals at the Rescue Mission homeless shelter in Syracuse many times, as well as have participated in the annual Ride for the Rescue charity bike race. 

The Rescue Mission is an organization that I believe is an excellent finalist for our class's grant, as it performs an instrumental role in the community. Poverty is an established problem in Broome County, and the Rescue Mission takes many steps to combat poverty. It has built a nonprofit business model that is simply incredible through its Thrifty Shopper stores. The stores sell only donated items and clothing at low, affordable prices. Because of its affordability, many people going through hard times are able to purchase clothes at low prices. In addition, all of the proceeds go towards running the Rescue Mission's other ventures, including shelter and meals. In Binghamton, the Rescue Mission operates a dormitory and support center at Whitney Place. Whitney Place offers training, counseling, and education designed to help the impoverished get on their feet and find a place of their own. It not only provides shelter to the poor, but empowers them to find their own shelter.

The Binghamton Rescue Mission has applied for the grant in order to place more collection bins around the Broome County area. I can personally vouch for the success of these bins, as I have dropped off all of my donations to the Rescue Mission through a collection bin. The collection bin that I use is located adjacent to the local Wegman's, making it easy and simple to drop off donations before going grocery shopping. I have never seen it empty, and it is often completely full of donations. The donations are important because they are key to the operation of the Thrifty Shopper stores which fund all of the other services that the Rescue Mission offers. Without the donations, the Rescue Mission would not be able to function as its mission intends.

Lessons Learned About Giving Decisions

Dear Students: When Anita Borkenstein visited our class earlier this semester, she shared her experience with Westchester Impact 100, her giving circle.  As you start to make your final giving decisions, she has generously agreed to share her reflections about what she learned in that process for our blog.  Please feel free to comment on her reflections and their implications for your grantmaking process

How to Give Away $187,000 to Not-for-Profits (NFPs) in Westchester County

A Good Problem to Have!

I could not believe how well membership recruitment went this year.  We convinced 187 women to join (or rejoin) Impact100 Westchester!  Membership is $1,000 per person.  We pool ALL the money together to make transformational grants to local charities.

Once membership recruitment closes we announce the grant amounts to the NFP community.  Last year, our inaugural cycle, we had 132 members; we gave one Project Grant of $100,000 and three Operating Grants of  $10,660.  All finalists received an award. Our challenge this year, how to distribute $187,000 into Project and Operating Grants? If we implemented last year’s strategy, too much money would be awarded in operating grants when transformational grants are our focus.

What to do? Should we continue to give one Project Grant of $100,000 or make two for a lesser amount?  Do we need to stick with our signature award of $100,000 for branding purposes? How much of an Operating Grant should we award to the three finalists; those funds are disbursed with no strings attached.

On a cold day in December, the Executive Board convened in my kitchen to debate the issue and discuss our options. We talked about it all the time during the membership drive, but now it was decision time. Donna came up with the perfect solution, let the members decide! 

First we put several options to a vote by the Board of Directors.  18 women had three options to choose from.  Then we put the Board’s favorite two options to a membership vote.  145 women out of 187 voted.  They decided 60/40 to give two transformational Project Grants of $85,000 each and two Operating Grants of $8,500 each to the finalists.  We are DOUBLING THE IMPACT in 2015!

What Choosing Finalists Says About Us

Back in December, my favorite thing about signing up for this class was I get to make a difference. Back home I’d been so involved in my community, and coming here as a freshman, I loved the idea of taking a class that pushed me right back into the world of volunteering and charity and taught me how to be a philanthropist. I loved how I would never be angry when we gave away the money. In my mind, we’d all be personifications of the word fierce, debating for hours back and forth on how to best save the world. In the end, the winners would rise out of the clouds of dust, and we’d all smile, because we’d have fought well and made a difference.

However, that’s not how my deliberations went. When we presented finalists, my group didn’t fight for hours or debate with righteous indignation; we sat in the Marketplace and picked names off the list that we could all agree on.  We used pretty clipart and bullet points. Everyone made very nice presentations that I couldn’t help but nod along to. Everything made a lot of sense, and I only asked one question which got a pretty complete answer. So I started to think, maybe we’re not gladiators. Maybe we won’t yell and scream and fight with metaphorical fists. Maybe we’ll all just agree on how to give. The collective decision-making process will be neat and organized, because we’ll all know it’s for great causes.

Then it came time to vote. My change of heart said this would be the easy part; the percentages would just line up, we’d have a list of finalists, and we’d barge onward towards a decision. Instead, there was the yelling and the screaming and the debating I was waiting for. Yet it wasn’t over charities, it was over percentages and numbers. I heard fights over whether we should need over 50% of us to like it, if we should hold another vote to see how it could turn out, and whether or not someone’s absence creates a confound. I had thought I’d be vying for my organizations to make it in. Instead, we debated the difference between 5 and 6, which for the record, is not 1; it’s 52 and 48. Instead of fighting over who was playing the game, we fought over the rules, and I don’t know which is worse.

 

Yet, I think I know why. It’s because we can’t get angry. All of these charities do amazing work. They all serve the needs we presented on. They’re all composed of people who just want to change the world we live in. I would never debate against organizations like Mom’s House or OASIS, even if they’re not my top choices. I can’t bash a good charity. But I can bash the rules. We can detach ourselves from what we’re talking about by debating the number of finalists we should pick, and the threshold they need for it to be considered a good idea. Those debates don’t require bashing a charity. Yet these debates don’t help the process. They just create gaps between us where there should be agreement, because we already proved we could decide effectively together. We’ll get angry because a group squeezed through with 48%, when we should be happy that now we’ll see how these charities work and make such a remarkable difference in the community.

I think we need to focus on what’s important, and that’s making the best decision we can to help the best way we think we can. In my opinion, all we can take away from this is that at the end of the day, someone will get help. Some very deserving organizations will get some very large checks. And despite all I got wrong about this class, I will get to make a difference.

Why I Chose to Give Money Back to Binghamton 

First of all I want to thank everyone so much for selecting me as the winner of the Tweet of the Week challenge and Stephanie for nominating me, it really meant a lot. The tweet that won the challenge was something I retweeted, a Binghamton blog post titled "20 Things that Wouldn't Exist in Binghamton University Without Your Support." I tweeted about Binghamton because I was organizing Tag Day that same week. Tag Day was a day on campus where SPC ambassadors and myself hung up tags around campus on all the things that alumni donated to spread awareness to students about how much of our campus was made possible by donors. I hope you saw them! If you haven't checked it out, you definitely should check out what I retweeted, what’s on the list might surprise you! http://blog.binghamton.edu/20-things-that-wouldnt-exist-at-binghamton-without-your-support 

Alumni donations to Binghamton are surprisingly something that I hold of great importance. I imagine that many of my fellow classmates might be wondering why I care so much about alumni donations if I am only a sophomore. I hear complaints from students all the time when I partake in tabling or fundraisers for this school; the most common one being "I pay enough tuition, why should I give back more of my money!?" A little over a year ago I thought the same thing. I didn't care about alumni donations to Bing and I definitely wasn't planning to give back money to this university, especially since graduation seemed so far away.  However, a good friend of mine and next years SA President, Dillon Schade invited me to join the Student Philanthropy Committee. The Student Philanthropy Committee, also referred to as SPC, is a small student run group focused on increasing alumni donations to Binghamton by instilling university pride in current students. We want students to love Binghamton and be proud that they went to school here so when they graduate they'll be more than happy to donate. 

Why are alumni and student donations so important? They increase our national rankings. Every past, present, and future Binghamton students wants Bing to increase in national rankings for obvious reasons; it makes us look better on paper if we went to a higher ranking school. A little known fact is that alumni donations are part of the criteria that determine rankings. The more alumni donations a university have, the better their rankings. Besides national rankings, and this is the more important reason alumni donations are so important is that donations aid to make this campus a better place. So much of this campus wouldn’t be possible without alumni contributions, such as campus plants and structures, the Fleishman Center, and the Philanthropy Incubator! Tuition is not enough to cover the extras the campus needs. Alumni donations are what makes our campus a better, more exciting, and more intense learning environment. Many of the facilities and opportunities at this University wouldn’t exist without the generosity of donors.

I don’t want to preach to you guys about how important it is to give back or seem that I am annoying you about donating back to the school. I understand we are all #brokecollegestudents. What I do want to do is make you love your experience at Binghamton so much that when you are rich and successful you will give back. Student donations are important to this campus and I do want you to realize that every contribution counts, but its okay if you cant give! The SPC is working on events that will unite Binghamton students, events that hopefully become traditions that students will remember for years to come. One of them is Happy Office Hours. This event is for seniors only and it is exactly what it sounds like, a mix between Happy Hours and Office Hours. Students will have the chance to drink and mingle with their professors on campus to get to know them on a more personal level. Everyone in SPC is really excited about this event and if you are a senior you should definitely sign up! The only caveat is that seniors who donated will have priority registering for this event.

I hope this post wasn’t too preachy, considering a portion of the money I am giving away is money that students in the class donated I thought it was important to explain why I am giving your money away to Binghamton University. This university and SPC are two things I am really passionate about and I hope that came across. Please let me know any more events you think will unite the student body and make students love Bing even more!

P.S. Vote for Baxter J