All Quiet on the Philanthropy Front

Yes, yes we all know that times are tough. And as of late, philanthropies have found themselves in the hot seat. The Wall Street Journal recently published an article lambasting foundations for tightening their belts too much:
“An increase in the payout rate to 6%, all in grants, would eventually add about $10 billion a year to the coffers of nonprofit organizations to the approximately $40 billion that it is estimated that foundations now give. Foundations have claimed that such an increase would jeopardize the perpetuity of their assets, yet a number of studies argue that their assets could be maintained with a payout of 7% or 8%.”
The five pages of comments related to this article indicate that indeed, this is a contentious issue. What I found interesting, and surprising in this article is that 35% of the charitable givings went to religious organizations. Which should bode well for us here at JPS and the rest of the Jewish American non-profit scene…one would think.
“Mobilizing community in response to economic crisis, and changing trends in philanthropy,” were hot topics at this week’s GA summit in Washington DC according to blogger Naomi Rosenblatt. But is this just more lip service?
As a non-profit professional working on a dynamic new project for an established Jewish organization, I find that funding prospects are few and far between. The cold, hard reality is that aside from the support from one foundation who provided the seed funding for the Tagged Tanakh in 2008, all the grant applications we submitted in 2009 specifically for JPS Interactive were declined, citing the economy and or obligations to previous grantees. Donors seem hesitant to support “innovative” (read as risky) projects/organizations, and most funders are justifiably overly cautious in this economic climate.
It’s very easy for the prospective grantees to sit on the sidelines and kvetch that no one is supporting their righteous causes. Jewish upstarts, PresenTense, dedicated an entire issue to the state of Jewish philanthropy. Some of their writers suggested funding people not projects and pointed to supporting peer communities like the Bronfman Youth Fellowships and ROI Community as a way to catalyze individual action within a structured framework.
As someone who has been in the Jewish fundraising trenches for over two years, I guess my greatest frustration is the amount of time I dedicate to fundraising, as opposed to doing my job to create an engaging online experience with Jewish text. I guess it’s similar to the crunch politicians feel with funding their campaigns rather than focusing on their civic duty.
If only this pickle came with a juicy Reuben to satisfy our needs!
P.S. My next blog post will focus on the role of non-profits and their responsibility to become more efficient and viable in this new market. It takes two to tango, and the onus to keep important services available falls not just on the choreographers, but also on the performers dancing the steps.


!!!
Yes, absolutely agree!
P.S. My site - resume writing help
It is generally agreed that
It is generally agreed that the word was coined 2500 years ago in ancient Greece, by the playwright Aeschylus, or whoever else wrote Prometheus Bound (line 11). There the author told as a myth how the primitive creatures that were created to be human, at first had no knowledge, skills, or culture of any kind—so they lived in caves, in the dark, in constant fear for their lives. Zeus, the tyrannical king of the gods, decided to destroy them, but Prometheus, a Titan whose name meant “forethought,” out of his “philanthropos tropos” or “humanity-loving character” gave them two empowering, life-enhancing, gifts: fire, symbolizing all knowledge, skills, isc cissp, technology, arts, and science; and “blind hope” or optimism. The two went together—with fire, humans could be optimistic; with optimism, they could use fire constructively, to improve the human condition.
this is so true and very few
this is so true and very few of us will actually take heed of it.