Skip to main content
Category

Feature

Teach for America retools efforts to recruit graduates from top colleges

By Education, Feature

By Emma Brown, national education reporter, The Washington Post |

Teach for America has spent most of its 25 years working to expand, growing from a concept outlined in a Princeton student’s honors thesis to an education-reform juggernaut that places thousands of idealistic college graduates in some of the nation’s neediest classrooms.

But that growth has stalled. Applications for TFA’s two-year teaching stints have plummeted 35 percent during the past three years, forcing the organization to reexamine and reinvent how it sells itself to prospective corps members. It has been focusing particularly on how to engage students at the nation’s most-selective colleges, where the decline in interest has been among the steepest.

“It’s going to take us time to recover,” said Elisa Villanueva Beard, TFA’s chief executive, noting that the organization’s leaders are trying to “step back and take a really honest look” at why TFA is struggling to attract interest and how to reverse the trend.

Button Text

A long side profits, a shared value

By Feature

By Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors |

When Dora Lutz started her consulting company three years ago after working for a national trucking company, she planned to focus on nonprofit marketing.

One year into her venture, Lutz changed her focus after learning about the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and how it has evolved over the years. For her, it became no longer only about marketing messages or brand goodwill, but also about sharing value and using innovative business practices to make the world a better place.

With that shift, Lutz started a sister company, Giving-Spring.com, to help nonprofits plan for this changing environment and help businesses create giving programs.

“Corporate social responsibility has kind of segmented out in a couple of different areas. You have corporate philanthropy, corporate social responsibility and now you have this third thing emerging called shared values,” said Lutz. “Its principles eliminate the notion that social responsibility is a trade-off and instead provide a framework for collaboration, innovation and mutual benefit.

“You can kind of think about the segments as a continuum and have a bit of all three areas. In theory, a corporate partner is trying to say, ‘How can we engage meaningfully in the community?’”

The idea of corporate shared value (CSV) originated from an article by Harvard Professor Michael Porter and Harvard Kennedy School of Government Senior Fellow Mark Kramer.  The authors presented the concept of CSV in a 2006 Harvard Business Review article, and detailed it further in a January 2011 article.

In essence, companies try to address major social problems as a core part of their business strategies.

Last October, Lutz’s company was certified by the Shared Value Institute to be one of three trained in the methodology and process. Lutz harkens back to Milt Friedman, an American economist who received the 1976 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. He believed that businesses exist to maximum shareholder value.

“What I see happening is that we’re correcting that and moving from that philosophy of an ‘either-or’ trade-off. It’s too black and white, and that’s not the reality of how our business systems operate. That’s why I think shared value is so fascinating. All the nuance of how this can change the world and how this can benefit our businesses.”

This conversation, in Lutz’s opinion, is becoming more widespread and more a part of corporate culture.

“I think businesses are recognizing that they need to do something for a few reasons. It started with millennials. HR staff think, ‘Oh, we need to do this to attract millennials. Then you’ve got the marketers who say, ‘We need to do something because this is how we’re going to create customer loyalty.’ Now, CFOs are putting out data around the value of goodwill, and use the term, fallow assets, to recognize brand goodwill as it relates to social responsibility.”

Lutz has also seen CEOs becoming more active.

“I think it has been moving up steadily through organizations and CEOs are saying, ‘We need to be paying attention to this.’ The conversation is evolving from branding, to, in order to be effective, shared value has to be part of your organizational strategy. With elevation to the C-suite, that ensures it happens more quickly.”

Some major companies, like Nestle, have begun approaching business explicitly using the CSV framework based on the United Nations Global Compact Principles. The company made 39 commitments in 2014 that it aims to meet by 2020.

Lutz sees Eli Lilly, for example, as a company that could have all three giving concepts. The company’s early learning initiative would be a philanthropic or CSR initiative that helps solve a compelling community problem, while working to solve diabetes in China would be a shared value initiative.

And that is where nonprofits fit in.

Right now, according to Lutz, nonprofits think about the philanthropic arm of a corporate partner and just asking for money to support the nonprofit’s mission.

“Both need to think broader because corporations are not thinking about nonprofits and their ability to solve challenges. So instead of a company saying, ‘We’re going to solve this.’ They’re going to say, ‘Who are our partners who already understand the mission, who can help support us in this initiative?’

“What you see happening is the conversation in the nonprofit sector isn’t changing from philanthropy to shared values. So nonprofits aren’t prepared to say, ‘Here’s how we align to help drive your business.’

“This is very much an emerging field. How do we do this? The primary thought is coming from the corporate side because technically nonprofits cannot do shared value, you have to be profitability focused in order to do shared value. But nonprofits can apply these theories into how they’re approaching their corporate sponsors. The opportunity to apply it to your corporate-giving programs exists, but no body’s really doing that yet.”

She sees FFA (Future Farmers of America) as a great example. Currently a client, FFA has agricultural partners who are starting to talk about shared value. Lutz is helping FFA think about how it think about supporting a company’s shared value initiatives.

While Lutz doesn’t have statistics about the reach, she has seen the conversation shifting. She noted that the Indiana Chamber’s Biz Voice magazine recently wrote about it, and last year Fortune spotlighted 50 companies in its Change the World list.

It ranked companies that have made a sizable impact on major global social or environmental problems as part of their competitive strategy. The goal is to spotlight instances where companies are doing good as part of their profit-making strategy. Nominations are now open for this year’s list.

Locally, there are other ways to get involved. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has offering events called Health Means Business, and offering them in different states. In February, one was offered in Indiana. There were initially 120 seats, but 240 people signed up.

“I think that says something about our culture and the interest here,” said Lutz.

It was well received, and now the Indiana Philanthropy Alliance, together with the Indiana Chamber Foundation, is putting on a second event.

The July 13 event, Healthy Businesses Fuel Healthy Communities, is more focused on foundations and the nonprofit sector and ways to leverage resources collectively. For more information, click here.

This learning and networking event is designed for business owners and leaders with an interest in finding ways to combine their corporate service, giving, and wellness efforts to benefit staff and the greater community. The content is also designed to link executives and program officers at corporate foundations with individuals involved with social responsibility and wellness programs.

States scramble to protect student data and privacy

By Feature, Technology

By Sarah Breitenbach, reporter, Stateline/Pew Charitable Trusts |

What if a child’s performance in a fifth-grade gym class could be used to set the rate for a life insurance policy when they’re 50? What if a computer program advertised interactive tutoring when your child struggled with long division?

Privacy advocates worry these scenarios could become reality as schools increasingly rely on outside companies to collect, manage and analyze the massive amount of data gleaned from standardized tests, transcripts, individual education programs and even cafeteria purchases.

This subcontracting is not new or uncommon, but it has often left school districts without explicit control over students’ personal information. And it has left some parents, administrators and privacy advocates worried that those companies might one day sell or mine the data for a profit.

With few protections on the privacy of student data beyond a decades-old federal law, states have been scrambling to regulate how student data is collected and stored. More recently they’ve begun governing how third-party companies can use student information.

Button Text

Making better use of big data

By Feature, Technology

By Sonal Shah & Hollie Russon Gilman, Stanford Social Innovation Review |

Big data has become a buzzword for private, public, and social sector organizations. For the social sector, there is a belief that “big” data is the new panacea to solving our greatest social challenges — whether criminal justice, health care, education, or international development. On the other side, there is concern about the cost of collecting data, the type of data we collect, and the real questions of privacy and ethics of data use.

We believe that data has the potential to help governments (local, state, and national) achieve real outcomes, but we need to ensure that we are collecting useful data, and governments need to put in place some practical safeguards before asking the public to invest in new systems and data collection. We need to examine the value of transparency of big data; understand the types of data needed to achieve outcomes; differentiate the differences between data, evidence, and judgment; and ensure that citizens are included in the conversation.

Why data matters

In the sciences, and increasingly in the social sciences, data has been a critical part of understanding, testing, and proving theories. It has the potential to more-effectively address critical challenges in our society — to target school interventions, improve health care, or help people find the right job training. Our ability to collect, analyze, and better understand data has become increasingly easier and cheaper. Even with limited resources, we can now collect micro-level information in real time, detect early warnings, and provide insights for effective, targeted interventions. Community- and heat-mapping techniques, for example, provide a wide range of valuable information, helping us better understand crime patterns and isolate hyper-local health conditions. In Chicago, data is helping Chicago Health Atlas identify health trends and provide hospital information. And Foodborne Chicago is using sentiment analysis (determining whether a piece of writing is positive, negative, or neutral) from social media and location-based 311 reports to detect food poisoning incidents. Data can help government provide better and more-effective services for its citizens.

Button Text

Software to fight terrorism, Microsoft-funded professor

By Feature, Technology

By Jing Cao, reporter, Bloomberg News |

Dartmouth College computer science professor Hany Farid — using funding from Microsoft Corp. — has developed technology to help scrub extremist content from the internet.

Working with the nonprofit think tank Counter Extremism Project, Farid built software capable of identifying and tracking photo, video and audio files, even if they’ve been altered. The software, unveiled Friday, would allow websites such as Facebook Inc. to automatically catch flagged content and remove it or prevent it from being uploaded.

On a call to discuss the technology, Farid, who is also a senior advisor to the CEP, said his software would allow companies to automatically remove posts that violate the sites’ terms of use. He also said deleting the content is not a freedom of speech issue because the companies have the right to dictate what’s suitable.

“We allow them to do it fast, accurately, automatically,” he said.

Many internet and social media companies, including Facebook and Twitter Inc., do have rules prohibiting posts from organizations that are involved in terrorist activity or organized crime or excessively violent, graphic content. But foul content gets posted anyway and relies on manual flagging and removal — more of a “Whack-a-Mole” approach, Farid said.

Button Text

India’s new CSR law sparks debate among NGOs and businesses

By Feature, Leadership

By Oliver Balch, freelance writer, The Guardian | 

India is the first country in the world to enshrine corporate giving into law. Following a change in company law in April 2014, businesses with annual revenues of more than 10bn rupees (£105m) must give away 2 percent of their net profit to charity. Areas they can invest this money in include education, poverty, gender equality and hunger.

At the time India’s policy-makers said the law would release much-needed funds for social development, while critics warned of a tick-box mentality and efforts at evasion.

Two years on, the arguments remain unresolved. What’s unambiguous is that overall charitable spend by companies has increased. According to independent reports, the private sector’s combined charitable spend jumped from an estimated 33.67bn rupees (£357.5m) in 2013 to around 250bn rupees (£2.63bn) after the law’s enactment.

Some say the change in law is also waking up corporate India to its wider social responsibilities. “The so-called 2 percent law has brought CSR [corporate social responsibility] from the fringes to the boardroom,” argues Bimal Arora, chair of the Delhi-based Centre for Responsible Business. “Companies now have to think seriously about the resources, timelines and strategies needed to meet their legal obligations.”

Button Text

Corporate social responsibility: How it affects employee satisfaction

By Feature, Leadership

By Ivan Widjaya, Small Business Trends |

Starbucks magnate Howard Schultz is one of many CEOs around the world that have embraced the idea of corporate social responsibility when it comes to how they run their companies.

You don’t have to be running a Fortune 500 company to be an ethically responsible company that embraces corporate social responsibility and all that it stands for. In fact, if you refuse to embrace it and all that it entails, it’s quite possible a strong majority of the people that work for you are currently unhappy in their jobs.

The definition of corporate social responsibility and the values and practices it embraces is a vast one.  Each company that embraces it has their own mantra that’s used to describe it: community investment, social impact, corporate citizenship, sustainability and many others.

In a nutshell, corporate social responsibility is all about company ethics — how you treat the environment, the communities you serve and work in and your employees. Even your competitors.

Button Text

Corporate social responsibility can be good for business

By Feature, Leadership

By Vlad Moldavskiy for BusinessCollective |

Corporate social responsibility is more than a company’s marketing strategy — it’s quickly becoming a way to retain millennial employees as well.

Despite having a reputation for being arrogant and lazy, millennials are actually highly philanthropic. Many young workers want more than just a paycheck from their employer; they also want to feel that they’re making an impact on the community.

According to the recent Millennial Impact Report, which was led by Achieve in partnership with the Case Foundation, more than 30 million millennials are employed, and 84 percent of these employees made a charitable donation last year. That’s on top of the 78 percent of millennials who made a charitable donation on their own without going through an employer.

It’s hard to dispute the millennial passion for giving back: When compared to managers, millennials value meaningful work over fat paychecks. Business Insider reports that while half of surveyed managers believe money is important to millennials, only 27 percent of actual millennials agreed.

Button Text

A new study: Taking the pulse the fundraising profession

By Feature, Fundraising

By Lynn Sygiel, editor, Charitable Advisors |

America’s first settlers had favorable attitudes toward philanthropy, perhaps because charities traditionally were well supported in their native England.

This giving attitude laid the groundwork for fundraising as a profession.

But actual nonprofit development positions are relatively new, and the study of the profession is even more recent.

In 1987, Indiana University established its Center on Philanthropy, which has transformed into a national resource for education, research and training in philanthropy and the nonprofit sector.

Gene Tempel was part of the center’s beginnings, and later founded the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. He has led the charge to better understand the career of raising money.

In the mid-1990s, he and Margaret Duronio conducted the first-ever study of the profession. The study was revealing about the field, and provided evidence for the first time that for many in the field, fundraising was not their first career choice. Their study was published in a 1997 book called “Fundraisers: Their Careers, Stories Concerns and Accomplishments.”

Last summer, Tempel recognizing that this field research is not widely known, partnered with Sarah Nathan, the co-director and special projects associate at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy and adjunct faculty member, to resurrect and replicate the survey.

The pair distributed an exact replica of the study to 35,000 members of AFP, CASE, AHP and the Lilly Family School and received 1,900 completed surveys, which provided additional career insight nearly two decades after the first study.

Steeped in data, Nathan and Tempel are currently reviewing and compiling the findings, which will be released this fall. This time, technology made the process easier, allowing electronic distribution and a more complex and sophisticated data analysis.

“We are still asking new questions and can do this because we have this much more robust data now. Unfortunately, the original data has been lost to time, all we have from the original study was published in the book,” said Nathan.

Earlier this year, the team shared preliminary data analysis at professional associations’ conferences.

Among the highlights:

  • Fundraiser tenure has gone up. People are staying on their jobs longer.
  • Once a fundraiser gains a total of 10 years experience at various positions, they then tend to stay longer at their next job, up to five to six years.
  • The characteristics of a good fundraiser are honesty and integrity. Why those traits are the most prominent will be analyzed by the team this summer.
  • The average age when people enter fundraising is now 30, and the median age is 27.

“That means that half the fundraisers are 27 or younger. We think that’s a really exciting finding,” said Nathan. “We thought anecdotally (the age) has come down because there are a lot more trainings and higher education programs now — over 400 programs exist now in the U.S. in this field — but we didn’t have any evidence.”

In 1997, only 15 percent of development professionals entered fundraising as their first career and the average age of entry into the profession was 33.5 years for women and 33 for men. At that time, most learned fundraising on the job.

Nathan thinks the information might help address issues of shortages, knowing that people are now trained in fundraising, in philanthropy and nonprofit management, who are going to be the next generation of leaders in the sector.

According to Nathan, the survey also covered an individual’s career path, how he or she came to fundraising and how he or she learned fundraising.

Tyrone Freeman, director of undergraduate programs at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, said this academic year, Lilly Family program graduated 66 students with undergraduate, master’s and doctoral degrees. According to Freeman, most of the undergraduates have found employment and plan to stay in Indiana.

Freeman and Nathan both think a unique aspect of both their school’s programs is that courses are based on the most recent research being conducted on campus, which constantly refreshes the curriculum to reflect new research in the field.

Of note is that the degree program was started in 2010 at IU during the recession.

“We came in at the end of the scene, as it was kind of culminating. It really represents a new pathway of opportunity for students who want to specifically go into nonprofit work and want their studies to be on that topic. They are creating pathways, they are getting jobs in fundraising, they are also getting jobs in other aspects of leadership and management,” said Freeman, who came to the Fund Raising School beginning in 2003.

With more interest in capacity building, funders are helping to hire or train fundraising staff to be more professional.

Nathan’s advice to those entering the field is to find an organization where fundraising is support by the board and builds a culture of philanthropy.

A good first job is at an organization where everyone contributes.

“Go to a first job where you could stay for three years, and where you have support to be successful. So many people in small shops just cannot be successful because they don’t have access or infrastructure to be successful and the board isn’t engaged or isn’t setting realistic enough goals,” she said.

The study’s findings will be released in the fall.

UnderDeveloped: A national study of challenges facing nonprofit fundraising

By Feature, Fundraising

The 2013 study, UnderDeveloped: A National Study of Challenges Facing Nonprofit Fundraising, revealed that many nonprofits are stuck in a vicious cycle that threatens their ability to raise the resources they need to succeed.

A joint project of CompassPoint and the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, the report found high levels of turnover and lengthy vacancies in development director positions throughout the sector. More significantly, the study reveals deeper issues that contribute to instability in the development director role, including a lack of basic fundraising systems and inadequate attention to fund development among key board and staff leaders.

Button Text