Indy Empowered

SPEA-V 521 

[indyempowered-blog]

Trump officials have barred health experts from helping end one of the worst Ebola outbreaks in history

"There’s a fear of a Benghazi-type situation, that Americans might be targeted."

This article evaluates Trump’s decision to ban the CDC from aiding the Democratic Republic of Congo during an Ebola outbreak. The outbreak is one that would typically be addressed by the CDC, but threats to security are stopping US intervention at the outbreak’s epicenter. US involvement is called “especially vulnerable” due to politically motivated attacks in the active war zone and the tense relationship between the DRC and the US. Trump’s decision to keep federal aid out of the DRC means that international NGOs’ work on the outbreak is even more important.

This made me think of our reading from a few weeks ago about the role of NGOs when governments fail to provide a service. 

It also brought up some important points that we discussed this week about the role of international NGOs as they exist beyond one state power. The ability of international NGOs to operate outside of national boundaries is crucial to the treatment of this outbreak. Political nuances and Trump’s “America First” ideology are preventing governmental aid from the US. However, international NGOs don’t exist within one national affiliation and are able to serve the people on the ground with less of a threat of politically motivated attacks. The international NGOs are able to serve the needs of civil society and treat victims of the deadly disease because they are able to transcend political boundaries. 

[toostudentsthings]

Does It Matter What Motivates Business Philanthropy?

When a business gives back, everybody wins.

Group A  Original Content 10/24/2018

Thinking about our discussion, I was thinking if commercial foundations are not as good as other foundations because they may have different motive to establish the foundation. Or if we even think that commercial foundations are less charitable than other types of foundations.

In Prewitt’s reading, one of the critics has responded that vanity is one of the motives for foundations. Many foundations carry the name of the original donors, such as the Gates Foundation (364). In LeRoux’s reading, it discussed different motives of why individuals volunteer, which include coercive and egotism motives. Brian Jones has also mentioned some motives that commercial foundations may have.

I see commercial foundations as a generous gesture from companies. It is also a way to connect and give back to the community. From nonprofit organizations perspective, I think about commercial foundations as another possible source for the organization that the organization can benefit from.      

Overall, does motive really matter when it comes to giving (whether it is a foundation, donor, or volunteer) if the outcome is positive to the community?

[indyempowered-blog]

Your question reminds me of Prewitt’s definition of liberal doctrine. It says that it doesn't matter so much what good foundations are doing so much as what they represent to the larger society. They are delivering public goods. I think this could apply to business philanthropy. I believe the motivation is important to consider in business philanthropy because public perception of the philanthropy is also important. The public may see a company doing great work in the community, and they may be motivated to give back in their own personal or professional lives. In this case, the business philanthropy represents a value to society beyond what specific projects they helped with. In another scenario, the public may see through a business’s efforts to put on a PR stunt in hopes of covering up destructive business practices. In that case, the message that is represented to the public is that harmful business practices don’t matter if the company gives some profit back to the community. 

The value of business philanthropy goes beyond what money or volunteer time they give. The overall intention of their giving matters to the philanthropic culture of other businesses and individuals. 

[daniellewsmith7-blog]

Design firm serves meals, builds shelter for homeless

When Wheeler Mission needed help to expand, it found its architect in the kitchen.

Group A - Original Content - Week 10

Having volunteers design a new center is a bold move. I can understand why Wheeler Mission would choose to go with a long time volunteer, though. Keeping with the communal mission of the organization, choosing to work with someone who is familiar with the organization and deeply invested in its mission presents a much more positive image. 

Additionally, this pair of architects is very close to the “nucleus” of the organization, so they can ensure that the redesign is needs-based rather than image-based. Instead of needing to train and orient a new team or organization to the needs and mission of the nonprofit, the choice to use this pair eliminated the entire volunteer selection process. 

I am curious if/how the husband/wife team would be compensated for this. Will it continue to be volunteer or would they be paid an amount for this work? 

[indyempowered-blog]

This is an amazing example of strong volunteer cultivation. The LeRoux Feeney article emphasizes the importance of connecting volunteers with projects where they can use their talents and interests to advance the organization. The staff of Wheeler Mission knew their volunteers well and made an intentional ask to volunteer who are very qualified and dedicated. 

I also find it interesting how this makes the couple’s company look. The story highlights multiple times that they were volunteers in the kitchen who were asked to take on this project. If the company had put in a bid to do this project, they might have seemed more egoistic, even if it took the same amount of time and money to complete. However, knowing that they have been dedicated to serving the mission for 10 years in the kitchen and that the staff asked them to take on the project makes them look very altruistic. 

[indyempowered-blog]

California Governor Signs Landmark Juvenile Justice Bill

California Governor Jerry Brown has signed into law SB1391 ensuring that 14- and 15-year-olds accused of crimes will be tried in the juvenile justice system rather than prosecuted as adults.

This is a short news article about a new law in California that 14 and 15 year olds will be tried in the juvenile justice system. The law was influenced by Elizabeth Calvin, a Senior Advocate in the Children’s Rights Division of Human Rights Watch. According to the linked bio of Calvin, she has worked for years with a variety of stakeholders in the community to research, educate, and advocate for children in the criminal justice system. Her background of expertise in her field and connection with community members made me think of the policy window we discussed in class.

Advocates and lobbyists spend their careers becoming the experts that government officials turn to be made more aware on an issue. In this particular case, Calvin was the expert who had the knowledge and the opportunity to have her cause be heard by California Governor Jerry Brown. The Human Rights Watch website is full of interesting articles on public policy issues regarding human rights. Many of the articles refer to human rights violations that are so large in scope. However, meaningful policy change can occur when a specific case comes along and the right person is there to advocate for the cause.

[toostudentsthings]

Women Around the Country Rally in Support of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford

After almost three hours of testimony from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, the rallying cry from high-profile women and from supporters across the country has only gotten louder.

In this article, many women voiced their opposition of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court because of the sexual assault allegation made against him by Dr. Ford. This action reminded me of many key elements of our reading this week.

First, many members of the community have voiced their opposition to the nominee Kavanaugh. This is an example of the mediating structure because many individuals have voiced their united opinion and wanted to solve the issue of sexual assault with or without the government help.

Also, this action is an example of a community by Smith and Lipsky standards. First, this group of individuals is a community simply because they identify themselves as a member of this group. Second, this community contributes either time or money to the cause. For example, many members of this community have donated money, signed a letter, called the senator…etc. Third, the community is sharing and expressing their values.

Finally, this article brought an example of positive social capital. To explain, sometimes social capital can be used to benefits an individual’s own interest. However, in this article, social capital was used to benefits all stakeholders. Many individuals have used their own connections for their cause to be heard and accomplished.  

[indyempowered-blog]

An organized protest is an interesting look at how communities form in times of need for members. Members are all connected by a shared experience and set of values whether they are involved in any specific nonprofit organization or not.  Grassroots movements can gain momentum quickly when members are automatically a part of the community with no more qualifications than that they identify that way, as you mentioned. Members of the resistance against the Supreme Court nominee have a strong need to express a shared value, and the protests become that outlet. Protests are also a way for members of a community with shared values to interact and build a network with one another. Political speech is a critical element to maintaining democracy, and this movement of protesting and letter writing is an expression of democracy within this community.

[cjkester11-blog]

If Democracy is Failing, Are Nonprofits Stepping Up to the Plate?

Local action is the remedy for the plutocratic sickness that many see as having weakened the American body politic.

Berger and Neuhaus proposed to us the idea in our readings this past week that mediating structures, and in this case nonprofit organizations are one of the key elements to having a vibrant democracy. This article from Nonprofit Quarterly opens by reminding us of the value that have an involved civil sector can contribute to this vibrancy. I agree that our current democracy seems to more and more be driven by those that are wealthy and partisanship has cast large divides into our social fabric. What I find particularly hopeful from the article and the associated articles referenced within is that this shift in the culture of our democracy has enabled nonprofit organizations to step in and aid in bridging the divide. It references several organizations that are working to help create more informed citizens. These organizations help to create an entry point for people to become involved.

The article also mentions at its end the idea that local journalism can help to raise back up the quality of democratic practice. I’m reminded of our reading from Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone: Thinking About Social Change in America as well as the TED talk from class and how the power of more well-connected local communities has the power to reconnect us and in the argument of this article, to revive the vitality of our democracy. Increasing our social capital not only has benefits for our organizations but by becoming more connected we are able to understand, listen, and learn from one other and become better citizens.

[indyempowered-blog]

I like the choice of this article in response to our readings this week. All of the discussion about mediating structures leads back to the idea that nonprofits are organizations that give individual citizens mechanisms to have their voice heard and their needs served. A democratic society needs such mechanisms from nonprofits, especially when the government isn’t providing them. I agree with the article that we further we slip away from a democratic society when we don’t trust our legislators’ motives and we feel like our votes don’t count. We turn to nonprofits to be the organizations we trust and can participate in in a meaningful way. Independent journalism is also an important thing to point out in this discussion because of its power to be a direct voice to the people.

[indyempowered-blog]

Community Influences: Understanding Nonprofit Markets

Here, Steve Zimmerman provides a practical outline for a nonprofit market analysis that recognizes the reality of our “muted markets.”

This article is lengthy, but gives great perspective about the balance that nonprofits must meet to exist alongside for profit and government organizations. Nonprofits are expected to pick up the failures of the for profit sector, but can also be in direct competition with them. I found this to be an important look at market competition that failure theories do not address.

This article focuses mainly on charity organizations where the funder is not the recipient of the service. Nonprofits of this nature must keep a delicate balance between the needs of their many stakeholders. Zimmerman names five key elements that nonprofits must be constantly aware of to maintain relevant and vital in the market. They include direct beneficiaries, funders, other organizations providing similar services, labor input, and the political and social environment.

I also think this article would be a helpful tool when considering a strategic plan for any organization because it provides helpful tables and questions to consider about nonprofit purpose and market positioning.