For Immediate Release

Philanthropy’s Role in Katrina Response Holds Lessons 10 Years Later

“Responsive Philanthropy” shares how strategies like rapid mobilization, community feedback and support for institutional capacity help bring real change

RPSummerCover2015Washington, D.C. (8/25/2015) – The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) today released its summer issue of “Responsive Philanthropy,” exploring key strategies for effective grantmaking from experts in the sector. Released near the 10 year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, our cover story reflects on the crucial role philanthropy played in recovery. Other articles explore the importance of community engagement and the shortcomings of modern strategic philanthropy.

Philanthropy’s Response to Katrina: A 10-Year Perspective

Executive director of the Greater New Orleans Foundation Albert Ruesga reflects on the hurricane’s anniversary, praising the excellent work grantmakers did in helping the city of New Orleans recover. Ruesga contextualizes this work with the reality of ongoing inequality in the United States, asserting that there are complex social conditions that must be treated with the same urgency.

To Go Further Together, Philanthropy Must Include Voices We Usually Ignore

Douglas Bitonti Stewart, executive director of the Max M. and Marjorie S. Fisher Foundation, uses the example of his foundation’s work in early childhood education in Detroit’s Brightmoor neighborhood to discuss how community engagement is critical to the philanthropic process. He argues that this engagement is also needed at conferences, convenings and in other opportunities for shared learning.

Shortcomings of Modern Strategic Philanthropy and How to Overcome Them

Henry A. J. Ramos, CEO of the Insight Center for Community Economic Development, identifies how philanthropy’s increasing tendency to rely on metrics limits its capacity to bring about structural change. Ramos offers recommendations for how foundations can best align efforts among grantees, use their endowments in creative and purposeful ways and invest in institutional capacity.

Member Spotlight: Ford Foundation

This issue’s Member Spotlight looks at the Ford Foundation, which rocked the sector with a recent open letter declaring its commitment to battling inequality and increasing general operating support.

These articles, along with articles from previous issues, are available for free on the “Responsive Philanthropy Article Archive.” Hard-copy subscriptions to “Responsive Philanthropy” are complimentary for NCRP members and cost $25 for non-members.

The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy in Washington, D.C., is a national watchdog, research and advocacy organization that promotes philanthropy that serves the public good, is responsive to people and communities with the least wealth and opportunity, and is held accountable to the highest standards of integrity and openness. Visit www.ncrp.org.

###

To request a media copy, please contact Alison Howard at ahoward[at]ncrp.org or call (202) 387-9177 x33.

For Immediate Release

New Philamplify Report Criticizes Secretive Hess Foundation

NCRP investigation calls for greater transparency, strategy and public leadership to increase impact of this $807M foundation

Washington, D.C. (6/16/15) – Today, the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) released a comprehensive analysis of the Hess Foundation as part of its Philamplify initiative to maximize philanthropy’s positive impact in our communities. “Hess Foundation: Will This Secretive Foundation Evolve Beyond Checkbook Philanthropy?” found that the foundation is mysterious even to its peers and the nonprofits it supports, and has no discernible strategy for its $30 million in annual grantmaking.

Hess_Cover“The Hess Foundation is doing the bare minimum. If it wanted to, the foundation could have so much more impact on the issues it supports in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania,” said principal researcher Elizabeth Myrick.

A complementary Philamplify video on the Hess Foundation captures the frustration of NCRP executive director Aaron Dorfman when he can get no response from the foundation even after multiple emails, phone calls, letters and in-person requests. “This is by far the least transparent foundation of its size that we’ve ever seen,” said Dorfman. “Hess Foundation is completely inaccessible and has no website, which is outrageous in this digital age.”

Without a website, public information about the foundation is based solely on tax filings. NCRP’s study, which independently gathered feedback from Hess grantees, provides a rare glimpse into the foundation’s work.

Hess Foundation was established in 1954 by the late Leon Hess, founder of oil company Hess Corporation and former owner of the New York Jets. It is now led by his son and current CEO of Hess Corporation, John Hess. With more than $807 million in assets, it is ranked just outside the top hundred largest foundations in the country, and is the fifth largest in New Jersey, where it is based at accounting firm CohnReznick.

In addition to the foundation’s lack of transparency and strategic direction, the assessment found that the majority of its grants go to “large, established, often elite organizations” that have direct and personal ties to Hess family members. Less than 1 in 5 grant dollars explicitly benefit underserved communities and even fewer go toward solving critical social issues. The foundation and the charitable lead trust from which it generates income are heavily invested in Hess Corporation stock. It is governed by Hess’ three children, former New Jersey governor Thomas Kean, and another trustee. It does not have any professional staff.

The report’s recommendations include improving the foundation’s transparency, developing a grantmaking strategy that reflects the Hess family’s reported social justice values, collaborating with local nonprofits and grantmakers, diversifying its investments and increasing its annual payout to hire staff that can implement new strategies and build community partnerships.

As part of Philamplify’s efforts to promote mutual accountability, transparency and knowledge sharing, the full report, “Hess Foundation: Will this Secretive Foundation Evolve Beyond Checkbook Philanthropy?” which includes all findings and recommendations, is available for free on www.philamplify.org. NCRP encourages readers to share feedback about this assessment and the foundation.

About Philamplify

Conducted by top-notch researchers, Philamplify’s foundation assessments provide a comprehensive examination of a foundation’s grantmaking and operations. The reports incorporate the opinions shared by the foundation’s grantees, peers and other stakeholders, and offer recommendations designed to maximize foundation effectiveness. Philamplify.org users can comment on and agree or disagree with these recommendations and nominate foundations they want “philamplified.”

Last month, NCRP released its assessment of the Walton Family Foundation. Other previous assessments include reports on The California Endowment, Daniels Fund, the Lumina Foundation for Education, Robert W. Woodruff Foundation and William Penn Foundation. Additional assessments covering other top U.S. foundations will roll out in the coming months.

About NCRP

Since 1976, NCRP has served as the voice of nonprofits and the communities they serve in philanthropy. Through research and advocacy, NCRP works to ensure that philanthropy contributes in meaningful ways to the creation of a fair, just and equitable world. Visit www.ncrp.org for more information.

###

For interviews with Lisa Ranghelli, NCRP Executive Director Aaron Dorfman and Philamplify researchers, please contact Alison Howard at (202) 387-9177 x33 or ahoward@ncrp.org.

Patagonia Rallies for an Earth Tax

By Esha Chhabra

Forbes
Sept. 9, 2015

Patagonia believes in an Earth Tax: 1% of its sales, each year, go to environmental charities. Is that enough, though? …

According to the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, in 2009, the mega environmental organizations with budgets of $5 million or more took home half of all contributions and grants in the sector.  Yet, they only make up 2 percent of environmental non-profits in the country.

Read full article here.

 

Located in rural Ashfield, MA, Double Edge Theatre describes its work as “creating a ‘living culture’ by developing the highest quality of original theatre performance – based on artists’ interaction with the communities in which the work takes place.”

While maintaining a permanent center of performance, training, research and cultural exchange in western Massachusetts, Double Edge travels throughout the United States, South America and Europe, residing in communities for several weeks. The company works with residents, including local artists and tradespeople, to integrate the community and its history into each performance.

Double Edge’s goal is to elevate both artistic expression and the relationship between artists and their communities. This approach starts with their work in Ashfield. Each summer, the Theatre hosts educational programs for emerging artists, indoor and outdoor performances, community events and international artistic exchange. It was just as important for the program to become embedded in the community of their hometown as in their traveling programs. Double Edge knows first-hand that rural communities especially can be skeptical of, and even resistant to, arts and artists arriving on the scene and seeking connections. Yet residents came to see the value of the organization’s investment in their town, and it now enjoys tremendous local support, selling out its summer performances. Arts organization like this one are especially important in rural America, which is often overlooked by philanthropy.

Between 2010 and 2012, Double Edge received three annual grants from Hess totaling $18,000, with an additional $50,000 over the next two years focused on operations and infrastructure. Working at the nexus of arts, culture and community and offering both local and traveling programs, engagement of public schools and promotion of diverse performance and visual artists, Double Edge both aligns and contrasts with Hess Foundation’s arts and culture portfolio. Although Hess primarily funds large arts and cultural institutions, foundation board member Constance (Hess) Williams discovered Double Edge in Washington, D.C. when the group landed at Arena Stage, a prominent theater with a mission to produce “diverse and innovative works from around the country and nurture new plays.”

Williams met with Double Edge to discuss a possible grant, ultimately resulting in Hess’ investment in, “a distinct initiative to address Double Edge’s growth management, including support for a consultant to help us with board development and strategic planning.” According to actor, writer and co-artistic director Matthew Glassman, this project has proven critical to the organization’s sustainability. Moreover, the support targeted an area of nonprofit management that is too often ignored by most funders: organizational development and strategic planning. Glassman said:

“The fact is few other foundations … were able to help us deal with the issue of growth. If it had not been for the type of grant Hess gave us, our own growth, based on our good work, could have overwhelmed us. Hess support gave us the gift of time to focus on the business of growth, the development of our board, to hire strategic consultants. It has been vital as we have reimagined our scaffolding. … Where can an organization go when it is actually effecting change in the community, and really growing and succeeding but it is not clear how to grow and respond to success well?”

Hess Foundation support for Double Edge Theatre resulted from a bit of luck as well as both parties’ understanding of the challenges arts and culture organizations face when growing. Beyond the grant, the Hess Foundation has requested very little in terms of reporting or follow-up. Glassman notes, however, that he reports regularly on his own: “There hasn’t been a time that they’ve asked for more [information]. Given how impactful this grant has been for us, my reporting is pretty thorough.”

The relationship between Double Edge Theatre and Hess Foundation represents the best of Hess Foundation’s grantmaking, offering funding at the right time, in the right size and toward the right focus. However, examples like this, while promising, throw the Hess Foundation’s unrealized potential into stark relief. Much more common, in fact, are large unrestricted grants to established and elite institutions. By supporting the status quo, the more typical Hess grants, which go to institutions such as Harvard College and New York’s Museum of Modern Art, may or may not result in increased access or innovative connections between communities and the arts.

The Hess Foundation clearly recognizes the need for unrestricted grants for nonprofits to survive. Building off of lessons learned from Double Edge, Hess has the opportunity to be more responsive to the communities it serves, not just elite institutions. NCRP’s assessment of the foundation recommends that Hess include peers and grantees in the decision-making process to better envision the systemic impact it can have, especially among marginalized communities. The foundation would also benefit if it were to engage and learn alongside these grantees and to share what is learned with nonprofit and philanthropic peers. Strong, community-focused organizations attracting the support they need to sustain their missions is a success story for philanthropy and one from which foundations, first and foremost the Hess Foundation itself, can learn.

Elizabeth Myrick is an independent consultant with nearly 20 years of experience in the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors. She has served as principal researcher on NCRP’s Hess Foundation and Woodruff Foundation Philamplify reports.

Editor’s Note: This is the second in a two-part series. Read the first piece by Dave Beckwith.

Dave Beckwith’s call to action and his kind words about our work together in Louisiana remind me that this is really our moment; our moment as funders to answer the call to make a real difference, to practice strategic philanthropy and not just feel-good charity. Now, after the tragedy in South Carolina, and in light of the growing movement for Black lives, is an opportune time to take action, of course. This begs the question, though – where have we been? What we do now is important, but we should ask ourselves, what are we doing anyway? Why aren’t questions about race, equality, democracy and inclusion at the center of our work in philanthropy?

The Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation (WRF) is committed to this approach of strategic philanthropy, and we have to constantly challenge ourselves. We invest in groups that address outcomes – moving the needle in grade level reading, jobs and opportunity. We also work to build and support a genuine voice for underserved and underrepresented communities in Arkansas. We’ve tried to apply the lessons learned in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina, the hard-won wisdom born of that ugly time. Philanthropy has a long view, but we need to respond quickly to critical issues as well. We said at the time that the key to crisis response can be expressed in the old safety slogan, “Stop, look and listen!” Kris Putnam-Walkerly describes this well in Confident Giving.

This moment of national reaction, of horror, grief and determination to do better, has of course touched us in Arkansas. We’ve seen that we can do better, and we’re committed to taking action. In Little Rock, the City Year program supports young people, Black, white, Latino and Asian, mostly from middle class families, who commit to serving for a year in distressed communities. These young volunteers have been hit hard by the killings in South Carolina. WRF agreed to their request to support a consultant that could help the volunteers understand the moment, the history, the possibilities and challenges, and the feelings they are experiencing. We were disappointed to discover that, in spite of our commitment to building the field of social justice here, we couldn’t find a qualified consultant who was local. We had to reach outside our state. We can do better in the future.

In our community-building work in rural communities, people of color feel isolated and excluded, rarely engaged and unprepared to use their voice in determining their future. We’ve struggled to slow things down, to invest in strengthening that voice, to ensure that the people are ready for the process. Our grantmaking has to take that long term challenge seriously. No amount of attention to the symbols of slavery can cure the legacy of slavery and oppression by magic or majority vote. That cure, the redemption of democracy’s promise for all, is long, hard work.

I hear the passion and immediacy in Dave’s call to action, and I support it. At the same time, I ask that we as funders confront the deeper question. Is our philanthropy addressing the real common good? Could we use the power of the national attention to ask ourselves institutionally if we can change for the better? That is our challenge, our opportunity. Now is the time.

Dr. Sherece West is executive director of the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation. She is currently chair of the board at the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). Follow @ShereceWest and @WRF_Arkansas on Twitter.

Editor’s Note: This is the second in a two-part series. Read the second piece by Dr. Sherece West.

The killings in South Carolina have left me feeling both angry and powerless. I know that’s not true – we each can do something, or do nothing. But I’m longing for the days before I retired, when I worked for a foundation – that was power!

What would I do, I wondered, if I were executive director of a foundation right now, what would I do with that powerless feeling? First, I’d call my board chair and ask her, “Are you feeling compelled to do something out of the ordinary, to act in new ways to respond to what feels like an historic opportunity?” Then I’d call my colleagues, people in the foundation world who share our commitment to the voiceless, to empowerment, to civic engagement, and also use grassroots strategies. I’d ask them the same question; “What can WE do?”

I remember the time after Hurricane Katrina and the bungled aftermath in New Orleans. Our foundation had lots of investments in the storm zone – current and former grantees. We called and sent emails and tried our best to track them down to see if they were okay. What else could we do? I talked to our board chair, and she was open to suggestions, but we were small – comparatively – and our funding cycle was a slow moving thing.

So I contacted colleagues. Together we did a couple of things. First, we temporarily suspended the bureaucratic rules and let the funds flow, sending checks right away and deciding to catch up with the paperwork later. If someone owed us a big report we said don’t sweat it and waited until they could sort things out. Dr. Sherece West was at the center of this conversation – she had just started the Louisiana Disaster Relief Foundation (LDRF) and was collecting money from donors who could mobilize quickly. She agreed to send all our grantee groups money right away – if they were okay with us, they were okay with her. And she provided a connector for them to outsiders who were ready to fund something that would help. Together with other funders we raised money for a personal renewal grant to help the local organizers; help the helpers recover from the trauma of the storms. The Louisiana Organizers Renewal Awards provided a $3,000 stipend with one rule – get out of town and do something to refresh your mind, body and spirit.

That moment in philanthropy had a couple of things going for it. First, minimal infrastructure – we didn’t create new hoops for our existing groups to jump through. Second, flexibility – rather than creating a campaign that we funded them to join, we trusted the grantees to decide what to do. Third, we did what we did over and above our current ongoing work, not instead of it. In our foundation, the extraordinary spending came from the donor family adding a gift. Other foundations dipped into discretionary funds or into capital. Finally, it was fast – for us. The normal time lag between an idea and a grant check for our foundation was normally 18 months. Katrina response happened within three.

So what would I do if I were a funder right now, after the tragedy in South Carolina, and the ongoing movement to fight racism in this country? Of course I’d call colleagues and my board chair. I’d suggest at least one concrete action, in line with the Katrina principles. Could we offer money to the groups we already fund, over and above their annual operating support, to cover their costs in responding to the Black Lives Matter/South Carolina moment? Could we pay for buses to the National Convening of the Movement for Black Lives from July 24-26 in Cleveland? Maybe we could support grantees in convening their leaders to decide what to do in Des Moines or Los Angeles or wherever they are? We could send money for transportation and food and the meeting room. We could tell the people we already work with that they didn’t have to stretch the money they already had to meet the crisis. We could help.

Second I’d try to get other funders to join us in asking the groups we fund how we could help – and then work together to raise money for that. Not for my ideas – for theirs.

But I’d do SOMETHING. What happened in South Carolina didn’t just happen to strangers. It happened to my sisters, my brothers, and really to me. I’m not powerless. I can do something, and I will.

After 9/11 the Dalai Lama said:

“This is the moment of your ministry. This is the time of teaching. What you teach at this time, through your every word and action right now, will remain as indelible lessons in the hearts and minds of those whose lives you touch, both now, and for years to come. We will set the course for tomorrow, today.”

Now is the moment of our mission as funders, as the custodians of this precious resource for the common good. Let’s not let it pass out of lack of energy or courage.

Dave Beckwith is a principle consultant at the Great Lakes Institute. Previously, he was executive director of the Needmor Fund. He has also served on NCRP’s board of directors.

My husband and I started our family’s charitable fund shortly after we got married. Like other philanthropists, we wanted to make the world a better, safer, more respectful and welcoming place. Now that we have children, we want our children to grow up in a society that sees, respects and benefits from the diverse talents of all people – regardless of race, gender, creed, sexual orientation or identity, or ability. So how can our philanthropy help?

Over the last fifteen years we have donated to 96 different nonprofits. There are a few “one-offs” every year due to special events and situations, but primarily we invest in nonprofits year after year as we care about their causes and have deep relationships of trust. However, because we have seen that there can be a big gap between the excellent work that they do on a specific project or issue area, and the overall way in which they conduct their own operations, we are being more selective about our grantees.

To us, an excellent nonprofit lives its values 24/7 and across 360 degrees of its operations. This includes not only who it serves – but also who it hires, how it chooses and respects its board members and volunteers, and the welcoming nature in which it treats all people equally.

The issue of transforming how people see ‘disability’ and valuing people of all levels of ability inclusively is especially dear to our hearts. We believe strongly that those in the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors consider community members with disabilities, not only in their programming, but also in their daily operations.

One in five Americans has a disability. That is 56 million people. There are 1.2 million Americans between ages 16 and 20 with disabilities. Only 7 percent of people born with disabilities will graduate college. Every year, 300,000 age into what should be the workforce. But because of the discrimination and bias against disability, the poverty rate of working-age people with disabilities is over twice that of persons without disabilities (29 percent compared to 13 percent). People with disabilities are also far more likely to be victims or perpetrators of crimes and to have negative health outcomes. Furthermore, people with disabilities of color or who are members of other underserved groups are even more likely than their white counterparts to experience poor health, and may even face “double discrimination.”

For example, faith-based organizations are not legally obligated to respect the rights of people with disabilities. Sadly, many such groups do not hire people with disabilities, have them on their boards of directors or accept them in their schools or institutions. When they do work with people with disabilities, it is through a lens of pity as opposed to respect and empowerment. The same is true regarding how some treat people from the LGBTQ community.

For example, Goodwill Industries pays their executives more than $400K a year while paying literally thousands of people with disabilities sub-minimum wage. NBC News did an exposé showing that Goodwill has employees with disabilities who make 20 cents an hour. However, the donations to them keep rolling in.

As a philanthropist you can have a huge impact on social justice, diversity and inclusion without funding any groups that focus on those issues– regardless of issue focus I, we should mirror the kind of diversity and inclusion we seek and expect of our grantees. You can make a tremendous positive difference in the lives of people who have been marginalized throughout history. I’ve found three excellent places for foundations to start.

  • Request that your grantees explore ways of becoming more inclusive of people with from all backgrounds.
  • Applying a diversity lens to grants in a variety of areas, such as housing and poverty, can make your funding even more impactful.
  • Build a more inclusive environment by learning respectful language.

Studies show that 70 percent of young people with disabilities can get jobs and careers when they are given the right placement and supports. Encouraging high expectations, eliminating stigmas and connecting them to effective programs and support systems can enable positive outcomes. People with disabilities have abilities too. When foundations consider these facts in funding other areas, they find that their funding is more impactful when accounting for addressing the needs of people with disabilities in their work.

We must respect human beings and their right to be appreciated for the strengths they have, and not be defined by their disabilities. For example, a person who uses a wheelchair is a person first, and their wheelchair is a tool. They are not “wheelchair-bound.” We are “people with disabilities” (PwDs), not “handicapped” or “the disabled.”

We are most impactful when we are welcoming and respectful of the talents, experiences and perspectives that diversity brings to the decision-making table. People who have been historically disadvantaged – because of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender or disability status all comprise the larger society in which we live. Inclusion means promoting justice, impartiality and fairness within the procedures and processes of institutions and systems, and well as their distribution of resources. Similar to how the LGBTQ community and immigrants are working to gain acceptance and equality – people with disabilities should be valued as equal human beings and for the talents they have.

Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi is the President of www.RespectAbilityUSA.org, co-founder/director of the Mizrahi Family Charitable Trust and founder and president of www.laszlostrategies.com. To read more about this issue, please read this piece by the author. She is also a columnist at Huffington Post.

Walton Foundation’s Market-Based Ed. Initiatives Miss Mark

By Arianna Prothero

Education Week Blog
May 5, 2015

The Walton Family Foundation’s investments in market-based ideas to improve education—such as charter schools and private school voucher programs—are falling short, according to a new report. Although the foundation’s education initiatives have benefited individual families, those improvements aren’t spilling over into systemwide change, according to the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy—a Washington-based philanthropy research and advocacy group.

Read full article here.

I was excited to support and attend NCRP’s 2015 Impact Awards ceremony in San Francisco on May 19, 2015, following the Center for Effective Philanthropy conference’s opening reception. I was inspired because I highly value the critical role that NCRP plays as this country’s only independent watchdog of foundations. I am grateful for the steadfast commitment NCRP has demonstrated and the impact it has had on creating a just and more transparent philanthropic sector. That night, I was energized to be in a room of grantmakers and nonprofit leaders committed to impact and philanthropy’s power to support positive change.

Working with NCRP throughout the process of planning for this year’s NCRP Impact Awards – from nominations to the event itself – got me thinking concretely about how we measure impact in the context of social justice grantmaking and organizing. NCRP received many nominations of worthy foundations, and such decisions are always hard to make. The thoughtful criteria NCRP uses to identify potential awardees includes:

Exemplary Grantmaking: The foundation allocates a relatively high percentage of annual discretionary giving to social justice, marginalized communities, general operating support and multi-year grants. Its grantees have a visible effect on promoting systems change and empowering underserved communities.

Leadership in Philanthropy: Foundation executives publicly demonstrate a commitment to systems change strategies, including public speaking or writing about funding marginalized groups, serving on committees or other initiatives that promote social justice and making public commitments for social change (such as signing on to NCRP’s Philanthropy’s Promise initiative).

Diversity, Inclusion and Equity: The foundation shows a demonstrated commitment to diversity, inclusion and equity, especially along lines of race and gender, regarding foundation staff and trustees.

After all is said and done, impact answers the question, “what difference is this work making?” NCRP has explored this question over the years through its Grantmaking for Community Impact Project report series, which documents work throughout various communities in the U.S.

This series makes the following observations about achieving impact:

  • It is hard to generalize the definition of impact, and thus impacts are highly specific to a community or region.
  • While some advocacy work is quantifiable, cultural impacts are harder to measure.
  • Long-term impact requires long-term funder commitments and community engagement.

These lessons were reflected throughout the thoughtful acceptance speeches of this year’s Impact Award recipients. For example, Maria Mottola of the New York Foundation described how the foundation’s grantees are achieving impact, saying, “Groups like Community Action for Safe Apartments (CASA) make sure that the impact of community organizing is not only transactional in some abstract way but is also transformative in the lives of real people in neighborhoods.” While tenant turnout at a Bronx Housing Court is easily quantifiable, CASA organizers instead measure their success through the number of people who have been changed by being part of these campaigns. More than anything, they value how the energy and tenacity of community members fuel the success of their work.

Dr. Peter Long, executive director of the Blue Shield of California Foundation, described the foundation’s strategy to bridge the divide between healthcare providers and domestic violence prevention by facilitating partnerships between these two types of organizations. What difference has this made? Now, healthcare providers ask women coming in for annual checkups the simple question, “Are you safe in your relationship?” If the answer is no, the patient is immediately referred to a local domestic violence organization.

Long-term commitment plays a critical role in assuring long-term impact. Deeply committed and experienced grantmakers like the Needmor Fund’s Frank Sanchez focus on how grantees create impact, not funders. Frank explained, “Over the past 20 years, Needmor has invested in over 450 community organizations across the country. It has always been clear, it is the community organizations it funds that create the impact and make the change.”

Through my professional experience, I’ve seen the impact of these three foundations first-hand. Our other two awardees, Open Societies Foundation and Brooklyn Community Foundation, are also doing important work in their communities.

Each of these examples is unique to the funders’ goals and the organizations and communities they support. And that is one of the key takeaways from the Impact Awards – there is no one right way to create or measure impact. While, as a community of funders, we can be inspired by and learn from the great work of our peers, the awards ceremony reminded me that to be most impactful, each funder, in partnership with its grantees, needs to define the social change it seeks for itself. I am grateful to NCRP for lifting up and honoring the many different ways that grantmakers can support positive, long-term community change.

Leticia Alcantar is a principal partner at Lighthouse Philanthropy Advisors.

The Conservative Group Behind Scott Walker’s Political Rise

By John McCormick

Bloomberg Politics
March 30, 2015

“Without the Bradley Foundation, there is no Scott Walker,” said Democratic state Senator Chris Larson, whose district includes its headquarters. With almost $1 billion in assets, the group has financed research and policy experiments concerning public vouchers for private schools, voter-identification requirements and collective-bargaining restrictions—all issues Walker has championed. Bradley had ties to many who testified for the “Freedom to Work” law, which lets employees in union workplaces opt out of membership.

Read full article here.