The paradox of insular language
1 year ago
Monday, March 29, 2010
My Blog has moved!
My blog has changed names and its web address to better capture the focus of my postings. Please go to Smart Philanthropy to subscribe to the new feed.
Read more!
Monday, March 15, 2010
Philanthrovestment: A philanthropic investment that shares returns with difference-making organizations
Where do you stand on the continuum between charitable giving without expectations and social capital markets that expect social and financial returns? Philanthropists and their advisors are staking claims all along the continuum. The balance many are seeking is to learn from the best business practices without overreacting against the beautiful simplicity of charitable intent.
David Hunter staked his claim in an October 2009 article entitled The End of Charity: How to Fix the Nonprofit Sector Through Effective Social Investing where he demanded that pure charitable intent (which he admits can degrade into “delusional optimism”) be replaced by social investors requiring demonstrated social impact. His passion is performance-based philanthropy. In a recent series of Tactical Philanthropy blogs Sean-Stannard Stockton has been pushing for the integration of philanthropy and social capital markets. In fact his review of the 2009 SoCap Conference in Alliance Magazine made such an impact that conference organizer Kevin Jones has created the Tactical Philanthropy Track for Sean to present his ideas at the 2010 conference. This momentum surfaces the question: what new ways can we combine smart giving that gets results and investments that produce financial returns?
Defining Philanthrovestments
One answer is a philanthrovestment. A Philanthrovestment combines the characteristics of a grant with the financial returns of an investment. It targets giving opportunities that build the capacity of a nonprofit organization while providing ongoing revenue streams for operational sustainability. How does it work? To ensure that the capital injection will produce ongoing revenue for the nonprofit the recipient of the funds agrees to return a portion of the philanthrovestment to the philanthrovester at a designated time in the future. Since the philanthrovester is passionate about proving the viability of the new revenue streams and impacting humanity through the organizations services, there is a financial repayment but the the repayment is only partial. Then the philanthrovester has the opportunity to decide if another deposit into the nonprofit program is appropriate. That decision can be made based on the organization’s demonstrated impact or lack there of.
What does a philanthrovestment look like in action? Recently our philanthropic advisory firm Excellence in Giving sat down with a young microfinance organization in South Africa to create one. The US-based organization, Paradigm Shift, partners with South African churches who want to serve the poor by creating locally operated economic development programs that combine business training, microloans, and mentoring. For about $14,800 Paradigm Shift can launch the program, train volunteers to operate it, create a steering committee to oversee it, and establish a $10,000 revolving loan fund that serves approximately 175 entrepreneurs every 2 years. Once established the industry-low interest rate of 19.6% on the 5-month microloans can fully fund the program for years to come (taking into account currency risk). In this scenario a philanthrovestment is priced at $14,800 where $4,800 will be expended permanently on building the new program’s capacity while $10,000 (minus inflation) will be returned to the philanthrovester in 24 months. The philanthrovestment model would work for this organization because they require the local partner to buy out the microloan fund over the course of 2 years to ensure local ownership of the program. When we presented this “paradigm shift” to their executive director, their board approved it enthusiastically.
Philanthrovestment 2-step Diagram
The Potential for Philanthrovestments
The philanthrovestment represents one new medium that both invests carefully expecting a return and shares those returns with effective organizations out of love for humanity. In the case of a Guatemalan soccer organization that provides recreation, education, and personal development for children, we introduced one of our clients to a possible philanthrovestment that would produce a financial return and create operational self-sufficiency for their annual programs. Instead of giving a one-time $50,000 gift to cover a year’s worth of programming, a one-time philanthrovestment of $260,000 could build a regulation size Astroturf soccer field that would produce over $100,000 in rental profits annually. Those profits could be split 50/50 between the philanthrovester and nonprofit organization for the life of the field, or the philanthrovester could turn over all profits to the organization once the original amount is repaid and/or real social impact has been demonstrated for multiple years.
As philanthropists and their advisors continue to think critically about combining the best business practices and philanthropic goals, philanthrovestments should take their place alongside the best ideas. And if philanthrovestments sound to you like the right combination of accountability and love for humanity, then give us a call at Excellence in Giving to start maximizing your philanthropic portfolio and making a verifiable difference.
Read more!
David Hunter staked his claim in an October 2009 article entitled The End of Charity: How to Fix the Nonprofit Sector Through Effective Social Investing where he demanded that pure charitable intent (which he admits can degrade into “delusional optimism”) be replaced by social investors requiring demonstrated social impact. His passion is performance-based philanthropy. In a recent series of Tactical Philanthropy blogs Sean-Stannard Stockton has been pushing for the integration of philanthropy and social capital markets. In fact his review of the 2009 SoCap Conference in Alliance Magazine made such an impact that conference organizer Kevin Jones has created the Tactical Philanthropy Track for Sean to present his ideas at the 2010 conference. This momentum surfaces the question: what new ways can we combine smart giving that gets results and investments that produce financial returns?
Defining Philanthrovestments
One answer is a philanthrovestment. A Philanthrovestment combines the characteristics of a grant with the financial returns of an investment. It targets giving opportunities that build the capacity of a nonprofit organization while providing ongoing revenue streams for operational sustainability. How does it work? To ensure that the capital injection will produce ongoing revenue for the nonprofit the recipient of the funds agrees to return a portion of the philanthrovestment to the philanthrovester at a designated time in the future. Since the philanthrovester is passionate about proving the viability of the new revenue streams and impacting humanity through the organizations services, there is a financial repayment but the the repayment is only partial. Then the philanthrovester has the opportunity to decide if another deposit into the nonprofit program is appropriate. That decision can be made based on the organization’s demonstrated impact or lack there of.
What does a philanthrovestment look like in action? Recently our philanthropic advisory firm Excellence in Giving sat down with a young microfinance organization in South Africa to create one. The US-based organization, Paradigm Shift, partners with South African churches who want to serve the poor by creating locally operated economic development programs that combine business training, microloans, and mentoring. For about $14,800 Paradigm Shift can launch the program, train volunteers to operate it, create a steering committee to oversee it, and establish a $10,000 revolving loan fund that serves approximately 175 entrepreneurs every 2 years. Once established the industry-low interest rate of 19.6% on the 5-month microloans can fully fund the program for years to come (taking into account currency risk). In this scenario a philanthrovestment is priced at $14,800 where $4,800 will be expended permanently on building the new program’s capacity while $10,000 (minus inflation) will be returned to the philanthrovester in 24 months. The philanthrovestment model would work for this organization because they require the local partner to buy out the microloan fund over the course of 2 years to ensure local ownership of the program. When we presented this “paradigm shift” to their executive director, their board approved it enthusiastically.
Philanthrovestment 2-step Diagram
The Potential for Philanthrovestments
The philanthrovestment represents one new medium that both invests carefully expecting a return and shares those returns with effective organizations out of love for humanity. In the case of a Guatemalan soccer organization that provides recreation, education, and personal development for children, we introduced one of our clients to a possible philanthrovestment that would produce a financial return and create operational self-sufficiency for their annual programs. Instead of giving a one-time $50,000 gift to cover a year’s worth of programming, a one-time philanthrovestment of $260,000 could build a regulation size Astroturf soccer field that would produce over $100,000 in rental profits annually. Those profits could be split 50/50 between the philanthrovester and nonprofit organization for the life of the field, or the philanthrovester could turn over all profits to the organization once the original amount is repaid and/or real social impact has been demonstrated for multiple years.
As philanthropists and their advisors continue to think critically about combining the best business practices and philanthropic goals, philanthrovestments should take their place alongside the best ideas. And if philanthrovestments sound to you like the right combination of accountability and love for humanity, then give us a call at Excellence in Giving to start maximizing your philanthropic portfolio and making a verifiable difference.
Read more!
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Being Generous by Theodore Roosevelt Malloch: Paul Penley's Book Review
Theodore Roosevelt Malloch’s embrace of the generous life and its reciprocating benefits bleeds through every page of his new book Being Generous. He wrote this short book with one simple goal for its readers: “Discover what being generous means, and begin living it.” Although he proficiently educates us on the tangible value of developing a generous life, he comes up short on practical advice to “begin living it.”
Chapter One (“Generosity: A Universal Moral Urge”) cogently captures the universal religious appreciation for generosity. Whether called Tsedekah, caritas, zakat, dana, Patshatl, or philanthropy, Malloch ably demonstrates that being generous is “not just a core part of the human condition, but a universal moral urge, our defining nature.” (29)
In Chapter Two (“Charity and Gift”) he focuses on his personal religious heritage and explains how Christianity continues the heart of the Jewish Torah summed up in the Creator’s command to “love thy neighbor.” From his analysis of Jesus‘ parable of the Good Samaritan he concludes that “a neighbor is someone whom we encounter and whose need we observe and to which we have the opportunity to respond by giving....” (32) That Christian call to charity has grown louder and wider as “[t]he growing interconnectedness of people around the globe” exposes us to the pressing needs of so many people near and far “from other ethnic groups, other nations, and other religious faiths.” (32) Malloch’s conclusion: God has created us to give, and therefore commanded us to embrace that blueprint for our life.
Chapter Three (“Stewardship Spirituality”) in essence continues the argument of Chapter Two while focusing on the concepts of grace and gratitude. “Those who truly understand the meaning of grace ultimately have just one way to respond, and that is with gratitude.” (41) In a genius historical observation Malloch presents evidence that socialist states replacing the concept of gift with the concept of one’s “right” to all resources for a good life actually dehumanize their citizens and destroy their generosity. For example, Lenin eliminated private charities after the Bolshevik revolution, and the Communist party closed down all ten thousand volunteer societies in Hungary after two years of control. In Malloch’s words, “Remove gift and gratitude from human society, and what remains is not a community but a ‘lonely crowd’.” (43) The main point: erased awareness of undeserved gifts undermines the gratitude that drives generosity.
In making this point about gift, gratitude, and generosity Malloch falls victim to reductionistic logic. How? First, he labels every person’s time, talent, energy, influence, and resources as a gift that they should steward gratefully. Then, he concludes, “[I]f a transformation is to take place and if stewardship is to become a way of life--a kind of ‘life principle’ that touches every corner of life--it must begin with gratitude, with genuine thanksgiving to God for all his wonderful gifts.” (45) This assertion contradicts both scientific facts (see Chapter Six) and anecdotal examples used elsewhere in the book (e.g., Ted Turner). A person may choose to give not out of gratitude but in pursuit of the joy that comes from generosity. It may not be with thankfulness for what one has but with the goal of gaining a feeling and reputation that one does not yet have.
The strict connection between selfless stewardship and gratitude for gifts particularly breaks down when one considers that many resources and talents are the result of working diligently and sacrificially and not merely receiving a gift. It is hard to treat what one has earned as if it were a gift. Of course, here the pragmatic reader bumps into a theological claim that all things come from God whether you earned them or not, and there is no real argument to be had on matters of faith. However, the careful reader will find that Malloch has a difficult time consistently using that logic in his promotion of generosity and view of personal resources. For example, he attributes good generosity in Chapter Five to an “appreciation” for “earning it,” and again in Chapter Eight, “[I]n giving we help ourselves. In giving, we demonstrate that it is we who control our possessions, not vice versa. ...The more we advance in generosity the more we advance in happiness and in turn are motivated to increase the good fortune of others.” (102) there are many more motivations to give than gratitude for gifts.
Chapter Four (“Time, Treasure, and Talent”) provides a concise reminder that giving can and in its most fulfilling forms will involve our time and talent, not just our treasure. There is little argument to be had, and I might add, fresh insight to be gained from his basic reminder. Overall, I applaud his comments in Chapter Four on “risky” giving but question his reductionistic claim about the concept of “genuine” gifts. As for “risky” giving Malloch notes that our “risk-averse society” blockades great gifts and hinders our growth as human beings (58). If the risk of giving ourselves and our resources prevents bold giving, then it in fact frustrates our pursuit of the deepest human experiences and joys. Being a philanthropy advisor myself, I have seen clients confirm his conclusion when they recall that the greatest gift they ever gave involved financial risk. As for his comment on “genuine” giving, I believe he succumbed to unnecessary semantics: “In short it is only when we devote our time on earth to others that we make genuine gifts.” (56) To judge the “genuineness” of gifts by one’s internal devotion appears somewhat superfluous or tendentious. I don’t think the many Oxford graduates whose lives have been boosted by Oxford’s educational quality and reputation are concerned with the insincerity or genuineness of Dr. John Radcliffe’s significant benefaction at the end of a miserly life.
Chapter Five (“Economics and Morality”) presents a striking macroeconomic argument. The thesis is: Good economies go hand in hand with virtuous practices and people.
Malloch employs arguments from economists Herbert Gintis, Tibor Machan, and Adam Smith to make a solid case for low taxation, free market societies producing more generous people with more money to give. He asks a sensible question: Would not earners be better trusted giving their money to help others than the government would be? As he sees it, “[G]overnments are poor at generosity because they use other people’s money and have no appreciation for either earning it or stewarding it.” (70) Here I am persuaded by his logic and wholeheartedly agree that there is a difference between a person carefully spending hard earned money to benefit others and politicians spending citizens’ hard earned money to ensure re-election.
Chapter Six (“Generosity and Science”) presents scientific data that humans are hardwired for generosity. From Stephen Post’s psychological research to Martin Nowak’s evolutionary research, Malloch makes an adequate case that humanity is designed for being generous and benefiting from it (despite the fact the he missed or omitted other significant supportive studies that Nicholas Kristoff has reported in the New York Times).
Chapter Seven (“Responsible Generosity”) is the first chapter to finally address the question of how to execute one’s generosity rather than simply exploring the motivations behind it. His intention with the chapter is noble. “Responsible generosity consists of more than mere good intentions. It steers clear of careless strategies or ideologically motivated theories. It includes a willingness to follow through, to examine the results of the charitable giving. It takes full responsibility for the use of the donated resources.” (83) Although I applaud the written description of responsible generosity, he does not provide guidelines for giving, possible accountability structures, or practical steps to examining results. Instead he cities ad campaigns and books promoting giving and an internet site that lists giving opportunities with no clear vetting process mentioned for those projects and their results. Since I serve multiple family foundations with the purpose of strategizing and executing high-impact philanthropic portfolios, I find the chapter void of practical guidance on the matter of “responsible” generosity.
Chapter Eight (“Generous Society”) is a difficult chapter to describe. From a reader’s perspective, it represents the least organized and coherent collection of thoughts in the book. Whereas Chapters One, Five, and Six present thematically coherent arguments, Chapter Eight joins Chapter Seven and Ten in compiling somewhat disjointed thoughts not always plainly connected to the chapter title.
Chapter Nine (“Generosity and the Purpose of Life”) is a questionable venture in overestimating the book’s call to generosity. As he considers the question of life’s ultimate meaning, he concludes, “[T]he answer is giving. That is what life is all about. Living well has to do with the extent to which we live generously.” (106) It is one thing to demonstrate that generosity breeds joy and quite another to assert its practice as the totality of life itself. His claim seems to be a classic case of unwarranted extrapolation (poor argumentation) driven by noble zeal (honorable intent).
Chapter Ten (“Final Thoughts”) ends with some simple and practical advice for becoming generous. His thesis for becoming generous is that generosity is formed in a person; so it is best to start young. That’s good advice. As for how to practice generosity, he urges a whole life commitment and provides four one-sentence tips on good giving execution. His point can be summed up in some of his closing words. “To be generous, therefore, it is not sufficient to give money: you must also give time and energy--the time needed to follow things through and the energy needed to convey your gift into the hands of the ones whom you wish to help.” (123)
As a believer in the joy and meaningfulness of generosity, I commend his compilation of motivations for being generous. Although they are not always presented coherently in thematically linked and structurally sound arguments, there is enough substance to make any reader give serious consideration to his call to generosity. However, as a philanthropy advisor, I must acknowledge that his practical advice on how to “begin living it” leaves the reader wanting. In my experience good intentions are not enough in the discipline of giving. Those readers who will undoubtedly be inspired by Malloch’s call to generosity will need more specific steps for evaluating past giving, creating a philanthropic focus, using available resources to create and measure impact, leverage gifts and influence, and find joy in the celebration of proven results. Of course, my critique is driven by the fact that I spend each day of my life walking people through those practical steps. So maybe I am being a bit hard on him and could benefit from a more generous review of his finer points. Hopefully one day I will get a chance to talk these things though with him and experience the generous character that so deeply shines through his words. Read more!
Chapter One (“Generosity: A Universal Moral Urge”) cogently captures the universal religious appreciation for generosity. Whether called Tsedekah, caritas, zakat, dana, Patshatl, or philanthropy, Malloch ably demonstrates that being generous is “not just a core part of the human condition, but a universal moral urge, our defining nature.” (29)
In Chapter Two (“Charity and Gift”) he focuses on his personal religious heritage and explains how Christianity continues the heart of the Jewish Torah summed up in the Creator’s command to “love thy neighbor.” From his analysis of Jesus‘ parable of the Good Samaritan he concludes that “a neighbor is someone whom we encounter and whose need we observe and to which we have the opportunity to respond by giving....” (32) That Christian call to charity has grown louder and wider as “[t]he growing interconnectedness of people around the globe” exposes us to the pressing needs of so many people near and far “from other ethnic groups, other nations, and other religious faiths.” (32) Malloch’s conclusion: God has created us to give, and therefore commanded us to embrace that blueprint for our life.
Chapter Three (“Stewardship Spirituality”) in essence continues the argument of Chapter Two while focusing on the concepts of grace and gratitude. “Those who truly understand the meaning of grace ultimately have just one way to respond, and that is with gratitude.” (41) In a genius historical observation Malloch presents evidence that socialist states replacing the concept of gift with the concept of one’s “right” to all resources for a good life actually dehumanize their citizens and destroy their generosity. For example, Lenin eliminated private charities after the Bolshevik revolution, and the Communist party closed down all ten thousand volunteer societies in Hungary after two years of control. In Malloch’s words, “Remove gift and gratitude from human society, and what remains is not a community but a ‘lonely crowd’.” (43) The main point: erased awareness of undeserved gifts undermines the gratitude that drives generosity.
In making this point about gift, gratitude, and generosity Malloch falls victim to reductionistic logic. How? First, he labels every person’s time, talent, energy, influence, and resources as a gift that they should steward gratefully. Then, he concludes, “[I]f a transformation is to take place and if stewardship is to become a way of life--a kind of ‘life principle’ that touches every corner of life--it must begin with gratitude, with genuine thanksgiving to God for all his wonderful gifts.” (45) This assertion contradicts both scientific facts (see Chapter Six) and anecdotal examples used elsewhere in the book (e.g., Ted Turner). A person may choose to give not out of gratitude but in pursuit of the joy that comes from generosity. It may not be with thankfulness for what one has but with the goal of gaining a feeling and reputation that one does not yet have.
The strict connection between selfless stewardship and gratitude for gifts particularly breaks down when one considers that many resources and talents are the result of working diligently and sacrificially and not merely receiving a gift. It is hard to treat what one has earned as if it were a gift. Of course, here the pragmatic reader bumps into a theological claim that all things come from God whether you earned them or not, and there is no real argument to be had on matters of faith. However, the careful reader will find that Malloch has a difficult time consistently using that logic in his promotion of generosity and view of personal resources. For example, he attributes good generosity in Chapter Five to an “appreciation” for “earning it,” and again in Chapter Eight, “[I]n giving we help ourselves. In giving, we demonstrate that it is we who control our possessions, not vice versa. ...The more we advance in generosity the more we advance in happiness and in turn are motivated to increase the good fortune of others.” (102) there are many more motivations to give than gratitude for gifts.
Chapter Four (“Time, Treasure, and Talent”) provides a concise reminder that giving can and in its most fulfilling forms will involve our time and talent, not just our treasure. There is little argument to be had, and I might add, fresh insight to be gained from his basic reminder. Overall, I applaud his comments in Chapter Four on “risky” giving but question his reductionistic claim about the concept of “genuine” gifts. As for “risky” giving Malloch notes that our “risk-averse society” blockades great gifts and hinders our growth as human beings (58). If the risk of giving ourselves and our resources prevents bold giving, then it in fact frustrates our pursuit of the deepest human experiences and joys. Being a philanthropy advisor myself, I have seen clients confirm his conclusion when they recall that the greatest gift they ever gave involved financial risk. As for his comment on “genuine” giving, I believe he succumbed to unnecessary semantics: “In short it is only when we devote our time on earth to others that we make genuine gifts.” (56) To judge the “genuineness” of gifts by one’s internal devotion appears somewhat superfluous or tendentious. I don’t think the many Oxford graduates whose lives have been boosted by Oxford’s educational quality and reputation are concerned with the insincerity or genuineness of Dr. John Radcliffe’s significant benefaction at the end of a miserly life.
Chapter Five (“Economics and Morality”) presents a striking macroeconomic argument. The thesis is: Good economies go hand in hand with virtuous practices and people.
Malloch employs arguments from economists Herbert Gintis, Tibor Machan, and Adam Smith to make a solid case for low taxation, free market societies producing more generous people with more money to give. He asks a sensible question: Would not earners be better trusted giving their money to help others than the government would be? As he sees it, “[G]overnments are poor at generosity because they use other people’s money and have no appreciation for either earning it or stewarding it.” (70) Here I am persuaded by his logic and wholeheartedly agree that there is a difference between a person carefully spending hard earned money to benefit others and politicians spending citizens’ hard earned money to ensure re-election.
Chapter Six (“Generosity and Science”) presents scientific data that humans are hardwired for generosity. From Stephen Post’s psychological research to Martin Nowak’s evolutionary research, Malloch makes an adequate case that humanity is designed for being generous and benefiting from it (despite the fact the he missed or omitted other significant supportive studies that Nicholas Kristoff has reported in the New York Times).
Chapter Seven (“Responsible Generosity”) is the first chapter to finally address the question of how to execute one’s generosity rather than simply exploring the motivations behind it. His intention with the chapter is noble. “Responsible generosity consists of more than mere good intentions. It steers clear of careless strategies or ideologically motivated theories. It includes a willingness to follow through, to examine the results of the charitable giving. It takes full responsibility for the use of the donated resources.” (83) Although I applaud the written description of responsible generosity, he does not provide guidelines for giving, possible accountability structures, or practical steps to examining results. Instead he cities ad campaigns and books promoting giving and an internet site that lists giving opportunities with no clear vetting process mentioned for those projects and their results. Since I serve multiple family foundations with the purpose of strategizing and executing high-impact philanthropic portfolios, I find the chapter void of practical guidance on the matter of “responsible” generosity.
Chapter Eight (“Generous Society”) is a difficult chapter to describe. From a reader’s perspective, it represents the least organized and coherent collection of thoughts in the book. Whereas Chapters One, Five, and Six present thematically coherent arguments, Chapter Eight joins Chapter Seven and Ten in compiling somewhat disjointed thoughts not always plainly connected to the chapter title.
Chapter Nine (“Generosity and the Purpose of Life”) is a questionable venture in overestimating the book’s call to generosity. As he considers the question of life’s ultimate meaning, he concludes, “[T]he answer is giving. That is what life is all about. Living well has to do with the extent to which we live generously.” (106) It is one thing to demonstrate that generosity breeds joy and quite another to assert its practice as the totality of life itself. His claim seems to be a classic case of unwarranted extrapolation (poor argumentation) driven by noble zeal (honorable intent).
Chapter Ten (“Final Thoughts”) ends with some simple and practical advice for becoming generous. His thesis for becoming generous is that generosity is formed in a person; so it is best to start young. That’s good advice. As for how to practice generosity, he urges a whole life commitment and provides four one-sentence tips on good giving execution. His point can be summed up in some of his closing words. “To be generous, therefore, it is not sufficient to give money: you must also give time and energy--the time needed to follow things through and the energy needed to convey your gift into the hands of the ones whom you wish to help.” (123)
As a believer in the joy and meaningfulness of generosity, I commend his compilation of motivations for being generous. Although they are not always presented coherently in thematically linked and structurally sound arguments, there is enough substance to make any reader give serious consideration to his call to generosity. However, as a philanthropy advisor, I must acknowledge that his practical advice on how to “begin living it” leaves the reader wanting. In my experience good intentions are not enough in the discipline of giving. Those readers who will undoubtedly be inspired by Malloch’s call to generosity will need more specific steps for evaluating past giving, creating a philanthropic focus, using available resources to create and measure impact, leverage gifts and influence, and find joy in the celebration of proven results. Of course, my critique is driven by the fact that I spend each day of my life walking people through those practical steps. So maybe I am being a bit hard on him and could benefit from a more generous review of his finer points. Hopefully one day I will get a chance to talk these things though with him and experience the generous character that so deeply shines through his words. Read more!
Monday, January 18, 2010
Strategic Giving Opportunities for Haiti Relief Efforts
Many lessons have been learned from international disaster response and recovery efforts over the past 50 years. Excellence in Giving hopes to make giving recommendations with those lessons in mind. What are some of those lessons? Here is a short list:
Evaluation Criteria
The following giving recommendations are based on an organization’s:
5 Giving Recommendations
There are many more great organizations who are working in Haiti that do not meet all these requirements (e.g., Doctors without Borders, Partners in Health, Red Cross, Americares), but these 5 organizations stood out after evaluating a couple dozen that had created a Haiti Disaster Response fund and met most of the above criteria. Here are the giving recommendations and their rationale:
1. WORLD RELIEF
Rationale: The day after the earthquake WR’s country director Dr. Hubert Morquette was performing surgeries at King’s Hospital in PAP as WR staff began organizing themselves. Within 72 hours WR added relief experts to their 40-person Haiti staff, set up the first of many feeding centers, and shipped in clean water and additional supplies from the DR. World Relief has years of experience in disaster relief, an indigenous staff that has been living in Haiti, strategic partnerships (with MAP Intl, World Concern, HOPE Intl, Tearfund, Medical Teams Intl, etc.), and a stable functioning office inside Port au Prince to direct the relief efforts. They have been designated as the lead organization for this disaster on behalf of the Integral Alliance of relief organizations (www.integralalliance.org). Their work will maximize the compassionate outreach of Haitian churches, and they are committed to ongoing community development in Haiti in partnership with churches for years to come. Due to their partnerships with other organizations and community members, their initial funding needs are lower than other pure disaster response efforts, but they will continue to invest millions in ongoing relief and recovery efforts if funding is available.
2. SAMARITAN’S PURSE
Rationale: In 24 hours SP had their disaster response team on the ground to assess the situation and deliver an initial batch of relief supplies. Comparatively, they have been one of the most successful organizations at landing planes full of supplies at the overwhelmed and damaged airport in PAP (3 DC-6s by Friday, 2 C-130s on Saturday, etc.). They have delivered those supplies to the Baptist Mission Hospital and partnered with Food for the Hungry to distribute survival kits, tarps, and water purification kits in parts of the city. Although they do not have long-term development goals, their efficient transportation, strategic network, and quality staff on the ground (e.g., medical team leader Dr. David Gettle) makes them a strategic gift recipient during the initial weeks of the relief effort. They will spend $20-30 million on their efforts based on comparisons to the Tsunami and Katrina (where they are still working today).
3. CURE International
Rationale: The day after the earthquake CURE’s hospital in the Dominican Republic sent a 5-person team led by Dr. Scott Nelson into Port au Prince to add their surgical expertise to an emergency medical location. They have been performing surgeries nonstop and more medical workers and supplies are being sent each day. CURE’s greatest strengths will be utilized after the initial relief efforts that focus on triage when there is a transition to reconstructive surgery both at temporary medical facilities in PAP and at their hospital in Santo Domingo (DR gov’t has promised to bring in large numbers of casualties). For the long-term CURE hopes to raise millions of dollars to cover the cost of building or rebuilding a modern children’s hospital in PAP where they can continue serving Haitians for years to come. So donations will cover costs of doctors operating in PAP and the DR, medical supplies, and the eventual building of a permanent CURE hospital in PAP.
4. WATER MISSIONS International
Rationale: Two days after the earthquake Samaritan’s Purse had delivered 2 water purification mobile units to PAP. WMI has 10 more en route, 20 more should be ready by Tuesday, and they have orders for a total of 62 units from organizations like Samaritan’s Purse, Food for the Poor, and Convoy of Hope. WMI has engineered a unique water purification system that is mobile, solar-powered, and capable of purifying 2,000 liters of water every hour from diverse and dirty sources. When diesel is scarce, water is needed in large amounts, and money must be spent efficiently to provide it now and for coming months and years, WMI offers the best solution I know. WMI already had a presence in Haiti with country directors who are ready to train volunteers and NGO partners on the proper setup and operation of the water systems. On Saturday more WMI staff entered Haiti from the DR via ground transportation. After their initial relief efforts, all units will be used for long-term development programs in Haiti that include health and hygiene training. They estimate that one unit costs around $25,000 to build, transport, and train others in its proper use and in the health and hygiene curriculum.
5. MAP International
Rationale: Medical Assistance Programs Int’l is a provider of medical supplies (like the larger Americares) to many key relief organizations like World Relief, World Vision, International Medical Corp., etc. They had $2.7 million worth of medical supplies entering PAP 4 days after the earthquake and a total of $5 million scheduled. With the combination of donated pharmaceuticals from large medical corporations and cash donations, they will be able to keep a steady supply of medicines entering the country. Because of the large amount of pharmaceutical donations, they claim that $1 donated equals $75 in medical supplies provided. Since an organization like World Concern ran out of medical supplies to distribute from their PAP warehouse in one day, medical suppliers with experience in disaster relief and a solid network of partners are critical to support during the initial weeks of the relief efforts especially.
Confidence in Your Giving
The philanthropic advisory firm Excellence in Giving will be collecting reports on the quality of work and the effectiveness of each organization’s expenditures on Haiti relief. We have evaluated effective and ineffective funding in previous disasters and believe donations to these organizations will prove highly effective in relieving the suffering in the next couple weeks and rebuilding the country in the long-term. If you agree with the criteria we used to recommend these organizations above the rest, then you should have the confidence you need to give what you determine is appropriate and experience the joy of helping those whose story is breaking your heart. Read more!
- Relief & Recovery: Smart donations go to organizations with quick disaster response (for the purpose of saving lives) and long-term recovery plans and experience (for the purpose of rebuilding lives).
- Overfunding & Underfunding: Organizations focused on the immediate disaster response tend to be overfunded (e.g., the Red Cross after 9/11) whereas recovery and reconstruction efforts are underfunded after the news stories stop.
- Cash & Commodities: Smart donations come in the form of cash and are better spent on commodities and services in the affected country to promote economic development in the process of relief and recovery.
- Foresighted Funding: Smart donations support recovery efforts focused on disaster preparedness and improved infrastructure.
- Culturally Informed Funding: Effective organizations to support have an existing knowledge of communities, cultural norms, and power dynamics that reduce unintended negative consequences.
Evaluation Criteria
The following giving recommendations are based on an organization’s:
- quality of staff on the ground in Haiti
- current and significant role in the immediate relief efforts of food, water, shelter, and medical services
- functional headquarters in/around Port au Prince
- a strong network of partners in the relief effort
- proven disaster response capabilities
- ability to transport supplies into Haiti efficiently
- commitment to long-term development after disaster response
- faith-based organization concerned about physical, social, and spiritual care
5 Giving Recommendations
There are many more great organizations who are working in Haiti that do not meet all these requirements (e.g., Doctors without Borders, Partners in Health, Red Cross, Americares), but these 5 organizations stood out after evaluating a couple dozen that had created a Haiti Disaster Response fund and met most of the above criteria. Here are the giving recommendations and their rationale:
1. WORLD RELIEF
Rationale: The day after the earthquake WR’s country director Dr. Hubert Morquette was performing surgeries at King’s Hospital in PAP as WR staff began organizing themselves. Within 72 hours WR added relief experts to their 40-person Haiti staff, set up the first of many feeding centers, and shipped in clean water and additional supplies from the DR. World Relief has years of experience in disaster relief, an indigenous staff that has been living in Haiti, strategic partnerships (with MAP Intl, World Concern, HOPE Intl, Tearfund, Medical Teams Intl, etc.), and a stable functioning office inside Port au Prince to direct the relief efforts. They have been designated as the lead organization for this disaster on behalf of the Integral Alliance of relief organizations (www.integralalliance.org). Their work will maximize the compassionate outreach of Haitian churches, and they are committed to ongoing community development in Haiti in partnership with churches for years to come. Due to their partnerships with other organizations and community members, their initial funding needs are lower than other pure disaster response efforts, but they will continue to invest millions in ongoing relief and recovery efforts if funding is available.
2. SAMARITAN’S PURSE
Rationale: In 24 hours SP had their disaster response team on the ground to assess the situation and deliver an initial batch of relief supplies. Comparatively, they have been one of the most successful organizations at landing planes full of supplies at the overwhelmed and damaged airport in PAP (3 DC-6s by Friday, 2 C-130s on Saturday, etc.). They have delivered those supplies to the Baptist Mission Hospital and partnered with Food for the Hungry to distribute survival kits, tarps, and water purification kits in parts of the city. Although they do not have long-term development goals, their efficient transportation, strategic network, and quality staff on the ground (e.g., medical team leader Dr. David Gettle) makes them a strategic gift recipient during the initial weeks of the relief effort. They will spend $20-30 million on their efforts based on comparisons to the Tsunami and Katrina (where they are still working today).
3. CURE International
Rationale: The day after the earthquake CURE’s hospital in the Dominican Republic sent a 5-person team led by Dr. Scott Nelson into Port au Prince to add their surgical expertise to an emergency medical location. They have been performing surgeries nonstop and more medical workers and supplies are being sent each day. CURE’s greatest strengths will be utilized after the initial relief efforts that focus on triage when there is a transition to reconstructive surgery both at temporary medical facilities in PAP and at their hospital in Santo Domingo (DR gov’t has promised to bring in large numbers of casualties). For the long-term CURE hopes to raise millions of dollars to cover the cost of building or rebuilding a modern children’s hospital in PAP where they can continue serving Haitians for years to come. So donations will cover costs of doctors operating in PAP and the DR, medical supplies, and the eventual building of a permanent CURE hospital in PAP.
4. WATER MISSIONS International
Rationale: Two days after the earthquake Samaritan’s Purse had delivered 2 water purification mobile units to PAP. WMI has 10 more en route, 20 more should be ready by Tuesday, and they have orders for a total of 62 units from organizations like Samaritan’s Purse, Food for the Poor, and Convoy of Hope. WMI has engineered a unique water purification system that is mobile, solar-powered, and capable of purifying 2,000 liters of water every hour from diverse and dirty sources. When diesel is scarce, water is needed in large amounts, and money must be spent efficiently to provide it now and for coming months and years, WMI offers the best solution I know. WMI already had a presence in Haiti with country directors who are ready to train volunteers and NGO partners on the proper setup and operation of the water systems. On Saturday more WMI staff entered Haiti from the DR via ground transportation. After their initial relief efforts, all units will be used for long-term development programs in Haiti that include health and hygiene training. They estimate that one unit costs around $25,000 to build, transport, and train others in its proper use and in the health and hygiene curriculum.
5. MAP International
Rationale: Medical Assistance Programs Int’l is a provider of medical supplies (like the larger Americares) to many key relief organizations like World Relief, World Vision, International Medical Corp., etc. They had $2.7 million worth of medical supplies entering PAP 4 days after the earthquake and a total of $5 million scheduled. With the combination of donated pharmaceuticals from large medical corporations and cash donations, they will be able to keep a steady supply of medicines entering the country. Because of the large amount of pharmaceutical donations, they claim that $1 donated equals $75 in medical supplies provided. Since an organization like World Concern ran out of medical supplies to distribute from their PAP warehouse in one day, medical suppliers with experience in disaster relief and a solid network of partners are critical to support during the initial weeks of the relief efforts especially.
Confidence in Your Giving
The philanthropic advisory firm Excellence in Giving will be collecting reports on the quality of work and the effectiveness of each organization’s expenditures on Haiti relief. We have evaluated effective and ineffective funding in previous disasters and believe donations to these organizations will prove highly effective in relieving the suffering in the next couple weeks and rebuilding the country in the long-term. If you agree with the criteria we used to recommend these organizations above the rest, then you should have the confidence you need to give what you determine is appropriate and experience the joy of helping those whose story is breaking your heart. Read more!
Monday, January 4, 2010
Learning to Give . . . From Those To Whom You Have Given
Many of us still remember the rapid outburst of violence in Kenya at the beginning of 2008. Hundreds of thousands were displaced from their homes, and thousands confirmed dead and hospitalized. I want to tell you a brief story about a few Kenyans who were affected and the unlikely men that stepped in to fund the rebuilding of their lives. The story is reminiscent of the widow whom Jesus himself admired as she gave her last two coins (Luke 21:1-4).
The period of panic and unrest in Kenya forced many people to leave their homes in search of a safe place to hide. Specifically, 9 prison chaplains who work with a ministry our clients have supported ended up camping out at local police stations. It was the safest place in town until the government could restore order.
Of the 9 men, some had their homes burned, some had lost their furniture, and one had been hospitalized after being robbed. Peter Mosabi Kihingu who supervises the chaplains in Kenya had no resources to help these men rebuild their lives after the devastation. So he wrote to his partners in the U.S. home office asking for help. The home office itself had no financial reserves, but one Colorado chaplain had an idea to help.
He took the request for help to his church on Sunday. Now this was no ordinary church that you or I could attend. The church consists of prisoners that meet in a chapel behind many layers of barbed wire fence, video surveillance, and armed guards. In a room of convicted criminals, the chaplain read the letter and asked the men to help these Kenyan chaplains who have spent their lives helping inmates across the ocean. By the end of that one service, a small group of men who make about 60 cents per day gave $375 worth of Inmate Withdrawal Slips.
When Peter Mosabi Kihingu received the generous gift to distribute among the suffering chaplains, he wrote the following response: "I must say I am deeply overwhelmed by the donations to an extent that I really lack the words to express myself as to what this really means to me and to us here in Kenya. Being a former prisoner myself I really know what this means to them."
At Excellence in Giving, our passion is to advise clients how to give wisely. However, we must never forget the nobility of giving sacrificially. These prison inmates who gave much or all of their discretionary income present an example to emulate. Out of their poverty and magnanimity, they gave. They gave to help 9 suffering Kenyan chaplains because a chaplain had been giving to them.
This story is powerful. It is an inspiration to give boldly-to display the moral rectitude of transformed prisoners. And who knows... maybe your giving will create new communities of sacrificial givers like this prison church in Colorado. In my estimation, that would be both sacrificial and wise giving. Read more!
The period of panic and unrest in Kenya forced many people to leave their homes in search of a safe place to hide. Specifically, 9 prison chaplains who work with a ministry our clients have supported ended up camping out at local police stations. It was the safest place in town until the government could restore order.
Of the 9 men, some had their homes burned, some had lost their furniture, and one had been hospitalized after being robbed. Peter Mosabi Kihingu who supervises the chaplains in Kenya had no resources to help these men rebuild their lives after the devastation. So he wrote to his partners in the U.S. home office asking for help. The home office itself had no financial reserves, but one Colorado chaplain had an idea to help.
He took the request for help to his church on Sunday. Now this was no ordinary church that you or I could attend. The church consists of prisoners that meet in a chapel behind many layers of barbed wire fence, video surveillance, and armed guards. In a room of convicted criminals, the chaplain read the letter and asked the men to help these Kenyan chaplains who have spent their lives helping inmates across the ocean. By the end of that one service, a small group of men who make about 60 cents per day gave $375 worth of Inmate Withdrawal Slips.
When Peter Mosabi Kihingu received the generous gift to distribute among the suffering chaplains, he wrote the following response: "I must say I am deeply overwhelmed by the donations to an extent that I really lack the words to express myself as to what this really means to me and to us here in Kenya. Being a former prisoner myself I really know what this means to them."
At Excellence in Giving, our passion is to advise clients how to give wisely. However, we must never forget the nobility of giving sacrificially. These prison inmates who gave much or all of their discretionary income present an example to emulate. Out of their poverty and magnanimity, they gave. They gave to help 9 suffering Kenyan chaplains because a chaplain had been giving to them.
This story is powerful. It is an inspiration to give boldly-to display the moral rectitude of transformed prisoners. And who knows... maybe your giving will create new communities of sacrificial givers like this prison church in Colorado. In my estimation, that would be both sacrificial and wise giving. Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
My Philanthropic Advisory Firm
Posts
