What is the role of a community foundation as a public leader? Lorie Slutsky, president of the New York Community Trust, believes,
“The role of a community foundation is to understand the problems and be a place that will stick with those things that need to be stuck with, build the capacity of critical neighborhood anchor institutions over time and leave the door open so new problems identified by new populations and challenges still have a place to go and be heard.”
Community foundations are quick to point out how different they are from private foundations. As public charities firmly rooted in place – be it a city, county, region or state – they must respond to dynamically changing environments for residents, nonprofits and donors alike. In New York City, Slutsky considers the Trust the “ultimate niche grantmaker” – distinct from its peers.
As the third-largest community foundation in the U.S., and after 95 years of operations, it indeed has a storied history. Philamplify, NCRP’s foundation assessment initiative, recently examined the Trust’s goals, strategies and practices from the past three years. The stakeholder feedback and findings lifted up in the report present valuable lessons for community philanthropy.
Our assessment analyzed how the Trust exercises public leadership to elevate and advance community goals, including the extent to which it:
- Leverages its reputation and expertise.
- Takes risks and innovates.
- Convenes and mobilizes stakeholders.
- Works across issues and funding silos.
- Collaborates with other funders.
The Trust was rated highly on many of these measures by grantees, peer funders, nonprofits and other stakeholders. For example, the foundation initiates collaborations with other grantmakers and partners with government agencies in New York City to achieve its goals. It was one of the first funders to tackle the AIDS crisis in the 1980s; this month it announced $550,000 in grants to combat Islamophobia.
The Trust prefers to leverage its reputation quietly and is known for a “purposefully understated” leadership style. Patricia Jenny, vice president of grants, explained,
“We actually don’t use the bully pulpit that much. Really because of the style of our president and the importance of maintaining some neutrality so that discussions can be had welcoming all perspectives. We think of ourselves as a venue for bringing together city and state government, private philanthropy and nonprofits.”
The Trust’s emphasis on “neutrality” may inhibit its impact; the Trust is reluctant to engage in direct advocacy and mobilization, which frustrates some of its constituents. Moreover, it has not effectively articulated an overarching, comprehensive vision for New York City and the communities it seeks to benefit. In fact, a third of interviewed stakeholders expressed confusion about what the Trust stands for. Illustrative of this feedback, one person commented,
“I don’t have a really concrete sense of what [the Trust is] holistically trying to accomplish with their grantmaking. They have different categories but if they have donors giving to them and competing with DAFs, how are they influencing what donors are giving to? And then how do they harness that to be able to grant to a lot of different organizations? I know they have different categories, but I don’t have a sense of what they’re really trying to accomplish. I can’t say the Trust does ‘X.’”
According to its website, the Trust’s mandate is “to make the City a vital place in which to live and work for all New Yorkers.” While the foundation’s reports and newsletters regularly feature justice and equity issues, oddly the Trust has no vision, values, or equity, diversity and inclusion statement to affirm these priorities. The Trust’s grantmaking and publications show dedication to issues of equity, so why is it hesitant to name its values? Does the Trust’s leadership style and interest in remaining “neutral” inhibit its ability to become a bolder advocate for the issues it cares about?
Our report recommends that the Trust “explicitly articulate a unifying vision and values statement for an equitable city,” and “improve communications tools, including the website, to more effectively convey how the Trust’s goals and strategies align with its vision and values.”
When a foundation clearly states its vision and values, it helps communicate how its myriad strategies are working toward community goals and systemic change. Place-based funders such as the California Community Foundation, Denver Foundation and Minneapolis Foundation openly name their priorities and the importance of equity and justice for their communities. This clear statement undergirds their public voice as advocates for that vision.
What do you think should be included in the Trust’s vision and values statement for New York City? Tell us in the comments below or share on social media by tagging @NYCommTrust and #Philamplify!
Caitlin Duffy is the project associate for Philamplify at the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). Follow @NCRP and @DuffyInDC on Twitter and join the #Philamplify conversation.
Leave a Reply