Posts Tagged by grants
|May 30, 2013||Posted by M. P. under Management, Philanthropy, Research||
Trends in large foundation giving are looking optimistic based on research from the National Committee on Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP), particularly in support for core operations and funding for programs aimed at underserved communities. The NCRP’s recently released Philanthropic Landscape 2011 series gives grantmakers and grantees alike a picture of whom is giving what where, and in which areas of interest.
According to the brief, The State of Giving to Underserved Communities 2011, by Niki Jagpal and Kevin Laskowski, foundations reported over $10 billion in grants for the elderly, women and girls, economically disadvantaged communities and ethnic or racial minorities in 2011. Key takeaways:
- The percentage of foundation funding reported to benefit underserved groups or areas increased to 42 percent in 2011 from 40 percent during 2008 – 2010.
- In 2011, one in five grantmakers (22 percent) was giving 50 percent or more of grant dollars to benefit underserved communities.
- Foundations in the western United States were more likely to fund underserved communities/marginalized groups (60 percent, although without the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation it drops to 30 percent), followed by the Northeast 35 percent, the Midwest 34 percent and the South 25 percent.
- Not including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Independent foundations, Corporate foundations and Operating foundations were more likely to give to underserved communities or groups in 2011.
Philanthropic Landscape 2011 includes reports on trends in general operating and multi-year funding – all available at the NCRP website.
|March 1, 2012||Posted by M. P. under NRM||
|September 30, 2011||Posted by M. P. under Management, Philanthropy, Research||
According to Census 2010 data, over a ¼ of the population of Pennsylvania (27 percent) is located in rural areas, and a considerable amount of our region of western Pennsylvania is considered rural. Yet in my admittedly anecdotal experience, it seems that much of the mainstream discussion in the sector focuses on urban organizations. The challenging issues faced by rural nonprofits, accessibility (a dispersed population), transportation (rarely any of a public sort), technology (reliable connections and coverage) and needs specific to non-metropolitan areas may be a bit of a mystery (hopefully not an afterthought) to the thinkers and influencers in the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors.
A report from The Bridgespan Group, Small but Tough: Nonprofits in Rural America by Alex Neuhoff and Andrew Dunckleman, turns the lens on rural nonprofits in the United States to examine what these organizations look like, identify their most pressing challenges and determine how they differ from their urban peers. Some highlights of the study:
- Rural nonprofits are funded at a lower rate per capita than their urban counterparts. Rural areas make up 18 percent of the total population of the United States, have a higher rate of poverty overall (22 percent of the country’s poor reside in rural areas) but represent 8 percent of the total spending in the nonprofit sector (including human services).
- In spite of the above, overall, rural nonprofits appear to be in a better fiscal state than urban nonprofits and are less likely to run an operating deficit.
- Data suggest that rural nonprofits have learned to be both nimble and aggressive, prioritizing and pursuing strategies perhaps different from those of urban nonprofits used to the close proximity of both clients and funders. The authors point out that rural organizations collaborated, merged and otherwise partnered with each other or a larger network, had strategic approaches to grants (private and public) and emphasized relationship-building outside of their communities.
- A major obstacle faced by rural nonprofits is leadership recruitment and retention, an issue Pennsylvania grapples with per a recent study on the challenges associated with rural leadership development.
The study (available for download at The Bridgespan Group website) provides an excellent initial picture of rural nonprofits, including a comparative case study of similar programs operating in two very different locations. I hope this type of organizational research continues, as there may be much to learn from the nonprofits operating 60 miles outside of Pittsburgh, but seemingly a world away.