Development & Fundraising @toostudentsthings - Tumblr Blog

The default perception among government functionaries is that NGOs are some ‘non-combatant foreign enemies’

Ali Dunham Week 13 Group B - Posted 11/16/18

This article made me think back to Salamon’s types of interactions between NGO’s and government. Particularly, the relationship of NGOs and the Pakistani government sounds very similar to Salamon’s explanation of the interactions between a government that is highly controlling of all aspects of a society, even how NGOs and other nonprofits operate. It sounds as though the government is trying to de-legitimize the sector in their country. However, it does also sound like there are some organizations that really do need to be regulated and have even committed crimes, much like some of the organizations discussed in the ‘After Democracy’ video from class. And while this article is an opinion piece, I do think it gives a good real-life example of how relations between organizations and government (depending on the type of government) can be strained and very difficult to manage. In this instance, it seems to be threatening the sector as a whole in the country.

After reading the article, I did wish that more information was provided on the work that the organization does in Pakistan. The article does mention at the end that the person works for Punjab Lok Sujag, which is a nonprofit organization focused on research, advocacy, and protecting and sharing the Punjabi language in Pakistan. I did try to research any other information on the organization, but unfortunately, I couldn’t find much else about them online.

What do you think of the described interactions between the two sectors in Pakistan? Does this personal account make you think of any other types of interactions between NGOs and government? Have you ever had an experience where the government has made things difficult for your organization (or an organization you know of) to complete a goal or task, or simply operate?

toostudentsthings

Thank you for sharing. As you have stated, this article is a great example of Salamon’s article of government-nonprofit relations and the reason why NGO looks different in different countries. I was surprised at the amount of monitoring that the government does to both foreign and local NGO, which could cause inefficiency and the NGO end up closing.

This article has also reminded me of Read and Pekkanen’s article about the straddlers. The authors mentioned that NGOs can work to deliver community needs and voices to the government. However, this does not work well in a non-democratic society (387). That is to say, NGO should know about the community and the government beforehand. For instance, if there are a lot of regulations and constraints on NGO, could the NGO handle it and overcome it? In the end, having this amount of constraints and monitoring in NGO is not in the best of the people in the country. The government could utilize NGO to help and make a better country and to gain support from their citizen.

lifeinacronyms

U.S.A.I.D., the American foreign aid agency, is conducting a trial that measures the impact when poor people abroad are simply given money with which to decide what’s best for themselves.

This is loaded with interesting connections to our recent discussions.

The first thing that comes to mind when reading this is the idea of mission advancement. Salt Lake City, Utah was able to eradicate chronic homelessness by simply housing people. They figured out that it was a more effective way to tackle the issue and cheaper for tax payers The idea was to get people housed and then take care of the aspects that lead to homelessness. People in stable situations that have their basic needs met have the head space to critically deal with some of these heavy issues.The idea of giving those experiencing poverty money, reminded me of this sentiment.

We have also discussed reasons people give and the factors that go into someone’s decision, one of these being percentage of a dollar going to the programming. This program boasts that 90% of the funds go directly to the programming, eliminating the “overhead costs.” While there is definitely something to be said for simply giving people what they need, are there any local educators on the ground that can help people manage these finances if they are unsure of how to properly allocate funds and create a budget? By removing NGO’s from the equation, is there a line of accountability for how these funds are used, and should there be? Should creating a sustainable and self-sustaining financial growth model be part of an international giving program like this? Another question I have is if these incredibly direct approaches prove to be more effective, what consequences may come from eliminating NGO’s that have delivered various services in these countries?

I am interested to see the effects of this program and the results that these researchers find as it continues. I do believe that empowering individuals in this way can be effective, as opposed to creating a model that creates a bandage to their problems while making the donors and volunteers feel like they are delivering a saving grace (like voluntourism can do), but there can be some issues if some factors are not considered prior to building a program like this.

toostudentsthings

Thank you for sharing. This is really a great article. I feel I should start first with answering this question provided in the article “is it better for us to figure out how to spend this money, or is it better to let poor people decide?” and my answer to this is it depends on many factors. One factor is the organization’s mission/goals. Marc Gunther has provided an example of the U.S.A.I.D giving them $100 unrestricted donation to families and they can decide how or where to spend it. As the article stated and in this particular case, this is more cost-effective for the government and impactful for these individuals. A part of the U.S.A.I.D mission is to save lives and reduce poverty. This is not to say that this is the best approach in all cases. However, from the U.S.A.I.D point of view giving individuals’ cash would be more effective to assist individuals than deciding what individual should have. Another possible factor that it also relates to the mission is the stakeholders’ needs. Going back to the article, U.S.A.I.D realizes their stakeholder’s needs and how it will be best met.

You have brought up a great question of how can NGO make sure that their clients are using their finances efficiently. I would say that NGO could utilize their volunteers and assign them to families or individuals to give them advice or lesson of how they can best stretch their dollar while clients still have the ability to use the money as they think fit best.

You have also added the question of the organization sustainability. An international NGO as any other organization should be sustainable. In the case of international NGO, they should think about what their goals and purpose of delivering services abroad and whether they have short or long-term goals. For instance, if it is an organization that is created for a development or a humanitarian assistance (long-term goals) then their sustainability strategy may look different than an organization that offers relief or recovery assistance (short-term goals).

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?

#marketing #nonprofits #philanthropy #volunteering #giving back

givingindy

Hold a special meeting of your nonprofit board to lay some quick plans about encouraging your stakeholders to make it to the polls and get out there and help. And, to be clear, you are of course allowed by law to do so.

This article specifically talks about groups of faith-based nonprofits who are making it a priority to get their stakeholders to the polls. When I read this article, I thought a lot about the survey we took in class on Tuesday (particularly the portion about whether or not your organization was encouraging people to participate in voting). The article and the leaders of these nonprofits suggest that NPOs can no longer take a sideline to political participation and must encourage their constituents to at least participate in their right to vote. From my own perspective, I have to agree. There is a difference between encouraging people to exercise a constitutional right and pushing the agenda of a particular party, policy, or politician.

toostudentsthings

I really enjoyed reading this article. Although I understand the importance of political participation, but I also think this could depend on the organization’s mission and values. In this article, Rob Meiksins noted that nonprofit should take an action in responding to the low voter turnover among young individuals and people of color by developing an action plan. However, not every nonprofit needs to spend their resources to encourage their board members and stakeholders to increase political engagement. In the New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC) case study, it makes sense of why the NYIC needs to encourage underrepresented individuals to participate in politics. That is to say, as I strongly believe in political participation, I do not think every nonprofit should spend their resources to encourage individuals to participate. Instead, nonprofits should think about their mission first and then examine whether encouraging their stakeholders to engage in politics will help the organization to further its mission.

The organization can also take the assessment we used in class and this can help the organization to see where they score high or low in the different elements. For instance, for the NYIC, it makes sense that the organization will score high in the civic engagement and the political advocacy elements because it closely relates to the organization’s mission. However, if they scored low in this two vital elements, then they have to develop a strategy to increase these scores.

indyempowered-blog

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

As you have mentioned, The Human Rights Watch deals with many issues regarding human rights nationwide. Human Rights Watch is a great example of a nonprofit that focuses on political advocacy. Political advocacy is defined as “Engaging directly in the political process to influence public policy outcomes” (Moulton and Eckerd, 660). The article you have attached resemble a successful example of political advocacy.

I believe that without political advocates and lobbyists’ help the Juvenile Justice Bill (SB 1391) would’ve taken a lot longer to pass or even discussed in the California Senate. Political Advocacy can be a very powerful tool for people who have no voice to be heard. In this example, Elizabeth Calvin, an attorney and a legal advocate for children’s rights, has helped to reform an existing law that is unfair for children. To explain, Calvin and other advocated and lobbyists who cared about this issue have helped children who have committed a crime to be tried in the juvenile justice system instead of being prosecuted as an adult.

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

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.

toostudentsthings

Thank you so much for sharing. The market tool is really useful when creating a marketing plan. It is certainly very important for a nonprofit to consider all aspects of the market wheel for the organization to achieve its mission (Zimmerman). The failure theories did not really talk about the large market aspect in nonprofit, which is one of the main challenges in nonprofit. Sometimes nonprofit fails because they have not studied the market well. There are many things to think about when you’re a nonprofit. For instance, who are my stakeholders, am I serving the needs, do I have enough resources...etc. The market in nonprofit is constantly changing. Zimmerman stated, “as communities change, so do the markets in which nonprofits operate. Shifting demographics, political and social pressures, and competition and resources require leadership to be continually ready to adapt”. Therefore, for a nonprofit to success,

Plus, as you have mentioned, nonprofits have many different stakeholders who have different needs and the organization needs to serve their needs. I think the key here is for the organization to prioritize their stakeholders. Here is another tool that I learned from a different course that will help the organization prioritize their stakeholders: https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_07.htm

lifeinacronyms

Government Failure and Community Ownership

https://www.ibj.com/articles/69748-chip-unveils-5-year-strategy-to-slash-homelessness-in-indianapolis Thinking about organizational and economic theories and the creation of the nonprofit sector, homelessness service organizations and alleviation organizations are definitely an area within the nonprofit sector that people think of when they considering this topic. Holland and Ritvo discuss this idea in “History and Theories of Nonprofit Organizations.” Stemming from Puritan religious duty, the idea of helping those experiencing poverty never left American practice. It is now what people often refer to when they think of nonprofits and charities.

This article discusses the new plan released by Indianapolis to alleviate homelessness within Indianapolis. The plan is specifically titled “The Community Plan to End Homelessness:2018-2023″. They encouraged meetings with the community at large to contribute to this plan (so we see hints of the ownership theory from Hansmann). Indianapolis is one of the only major cities without any government funded shelters, and I think Indy has recently come to own that idea that the local government has really failed here. There is heavy government failure in Indy, and at the federal level as well, when it comes to homelessness and poverty alleviation. Indy has done an increasingly good job of pushing ownership of their homelessness service organizations and the issues revolving around homelessness over to the citizens. Encouraging involvement like this gives this network of organizations more power when going to the local government to advocate for change. It also encourages innovations and ideas. When discussing homelessness specifically, it is crucial to involve citizens in the process because it is such an uncomfortable topic for most people and there are so many assumptions made about the population. Opening up this conversation to the public allows for a more open minded community wiling to help those in need instead of casting them in the shadows and saying “they just need to get a job.”

toostudentsthings

Thank you for sharing Amanda.

I was really surprised to learn that Indianapolis is the only major city with no government help funding shelters. The article you provided perfectly capture most of the theories we have talked about last week especially market and government failure theories. Simply, there is unsatisfied demand in Indianapolis (housing for homeless) and the government cannot satisfy those needs.

Also, you have mentioned a great point. You said that Indianapolis did a great job pushing ownership of the homelessness to the community. You stated that it is necessary to engage the community for sensitive issues such as homelessness, and I absolutely agree. I have skimmed through the Community Plan to End Homelessness plan and I am impressed not only by the large number of organizations who participated in the plan, but also, the different type of organizations that they have reached to. They have reached to 400 community members who participated in that plan including 170 individuals.

I think what attracted many of these members to the plan is because of the non-distribution constraint that was described by Hansmann. In general, when individuals give they know for sure that their giving will contribute to helping the homeless in Indianapolis, for example.

A framework for collaborating more effectively.

Nonprofit exit because the government failed to satisfy some of the public needs. In other words, nonprofits are filling the gap that government couldn’t fill. This article by Buffett and Eimicke is a very trendy topic lately talking about effective ways to collaborate with cross-sectors to make a social change. Collaboration happens when two or more institution comes together to try and solve a problem that they cannot solve by themselves because they do not have enough sources to do so.

Now is cross-sector collaboration the answer to market failure? When I usually think of collaboration in the nonprofit sector, I always think of nonprofit organization collaborating with another nonprofit organization who may have a similar vision but they have different resources or services. To an extent, cross-sector collaboration makes sense to me because of the services and sources that both sectors can provide. However, how would the public feel about the cross-sector collaboration? Would people give less or lose its trust because the nonprofit has collaborated with a government or a business?

#joint ventures

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Development & Fundraising