Here’s What Foundations Think About the New Florida Law Affecting Diversity in Philanthropy

June 25, 2010 by · Leave a Comment

I had so many questions after hearing about this new legislation in Florida that I requested comment from several organizations regarding their position on advocacy efforts aimed at curtailing how much state and local governments can do to regulate foundations and their diversity practices.

First I asked some of the foundations who are members of the Florida Philanthropy Network, which is obviously in support of  the new legislation:

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

“Our membership in the Florida Philanthropy Network does not constitute an endorsement of their activities on this legislation.”

“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation believes that diversity and inclusion strengthen the charitable sector’s ability to address social inequities.

Within the foundation, we actively monitor the global diversity of our workforce and we have joined several affinity groups to increase targeted recruitment efforts and expand networking opportunities for current employees. Attracting, supporting, and developing a diverse, global workforce is critical to our impact.

The foundation pays membership dues and provides general operating support to a variety of national charitable sector associations. We also are members of regional grantmaker associations, such as the Florida Philanthropy Network, in states where we have significant programmatic activity.

We were not aware that the Florida Philanthropy Network was advocating for this legislation, and we were never asked to sign on to a letter of support or endorsement of any kind. Our membership in the Florida Philanthropy Network does not constitute an endorsement of their activities on this legislation.”

Jessie Ball duPont Fund

“The Jessie Ball duPont Fund is deeply committed to diversity and inclusiveness.”

From Jessie Ball duPont Fund President Sherry P. Magill:

“The Jessie Ball duPont Fund is deeply committed to diversity and inclusiveness, as evidenced by our grantmaking and our practices within our organization.  For the record, we were not aware of the Florida estate-tax-fix bill prior to its being signed by the governor.”

Then, I asked some of the top infrastructure organizations serving nonprofits and philanthropy. (I’d love to tell you what Independent Sector thinks, but they never got back to me.)

Council on Foundations

“We believe that voluntary leadership prevents legislative mandates.”

“The Council on Foundations has always encouraged voluntary leadership and proactive steps to achieve greater diversity and inclusion as well as transparency and accountability in our field. We believe this stand is right, and we believe that voluntary leadership prevents legislative mandates. Nothing about our commitment or strategy has changed.”

Foundation Center

“Greater transparency is the best defense of philanthropic freedom.”

“The Foundation Center does not take any formal stances on policy matters regarding the operation of foundations. But as a knowledge resource for the field, we believe that more information is better than less, and that greater transparency is the best defense of philanthropic freedom. By providing data to groups ranging from the Philanthropic Collaborative to the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy and conducting research with foundations and regional associations, we are committed to helping philanthropy meet the challenges and opportunities of diversity.”

In reading between the lines, it sounds like these four groups are pretty much opposed to the new Florida law. Too bad they didn’t use their voices to speak up to let the bill’s supporters know before it was passed.

P.S. Join me on Monday, June 28 for a live discussion with Aaron Dorfman, Executive Director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, who agrees with me that the new Florida legislation is a major setback for philanthropy. Al Pina, Chair of the Florida Minority Community Reinvestment Coalition, will also be joining us.

Filed Under: Philanthropy · Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Council on Foundations Finally Welcomes Tribal Philanthropy Organizations as ‘Full Voting Members’

June 23, 2010 by · 2 Comments

There’s not really much I can say about this without scratching my head. This recent press release from the Council on Foundations raises some serious questions for me about why the organization is just now recognizing tribal philanthropy, “the oldest philanthropy in the country” as full and equal partners in their work.

The Council on Foundations is initiating a greater level of partnership with tribal philanthropic organizations by welcoming them as full, voting members of the organization, a move that was approved recently by unanimous decision of the Council’s board. Prior to this policy change, most tribal programs were eligible only for associate membership. Now the Council and its members will have more opportunity to support, learn from, and collaborate with tribal philanthropies.

The Council has been around since 1949, which means that it’s taken them six decades to become fully inclusive of tribal philanthropy. Those of us who fight for social justice might find ourselves with a queasy feeling in our stomachs as we read a little bit between these lines of the Council’s press statement:

The stronger partnership will give greater voice to issues affecting those communities and is an ongoing recognition of tribal philanthropy’s tremendous contributions to the public good.

It makes it seem as if we – and by we I mean communities of color – have to wait to be “anointed” by mainstream philanthropy before our contributions can be fully legitimized. How is it that the oldest form of philanthropy has been relegated to the sidelines for this long? The Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers offers a few clues that underscore the importance of the Council’s recent decision:

  • Mainstream philanthropy has not done all that it could to engage communities of color as donors, as leaders in decision making, or as partners and grantees. For the most part, these trends have shown little improvement in the past 25 years.
  • The opportunity for people of color to shape decisions in mainstream grantmaking institutions is extremely limited. Six percent of foundation executive directors and one in ten board members are people of color.
  • Organizations that serve or are led by racial, ethnic and tribal people are persistently under-funded. Foundation dollars targeting Asian, Latino, Native American and African American communities and organizations collectively add up to 3 – 4% of all foundation giving.

So, it’s no wonder why the Council is making such a big deal about this “partnership,” as Steve Gunderson clearly states that:

“This policy change reflects our commitment to supporting diverse and inclusive philanthropy in all of its forms.”

While I applaud the policy change, it probably goes without saying that the real news item here is the story behind why the Council did not previously allow tribal philanthropy organizations to become full members of the Council. I wish to God that I had that story, but I’m guessing it has more to do with discrimination than with the administration of “policy.”

Filed Under: Philanthropy, Race · Tagged With: , ,

New Florida Legislation is a Slap in the Face to Nonprofit Diversity Advocates Everywhere

June 21, 2010 by · 5 Comments

Let’s get one thing straight. I don’t really spend a lot of time worrying about those that have already made it perfectly clear that they don’t care about diversity in nonprofits. So for those of you that don’t give a rip, this blog post is not for you. But I do have beef with those in the nonprofit world who profess to care about diversity, yet refuse to do anything about it. Actions speak louder than words. Outcomes matter much more than intentions. Which is why everyone in the nonprofit sector who does care about diversity should be pretty pissed off at the foundation folks in Florida right now.

According to the Chronicle of Philanthropy:

Florida’s governor signed legislation last week aimed at curtailing how much state and local governments can do to regulate foundations and their diversity practices.

Drafted with help from the Alliance for Charitable Reform, the law prohibits Florida government officials from requiring that foundations disclose the race, religion, gender, income level, sexual orientation, or certain other characteristics of their employees and board members, as well as those of their grant recipients.

Yes, you read that correctly. Foundations that are supposed to be all about diverse practices are opposed to sharing the proof behind their hiring and grantmaking outcomes that would reflect that. So um, what’s the point of developing diversity policies if you don’t/can’t/won’t track your progress? Foundation president Emmett Carson asserts that “the new law calls into question what had heretofore been accepted about the virtue and value of transparency as promoted by key organizations that set standards for foundations: the Council on Foundations, Foundation Center, and Independent Sector.”

  • For example, the Council on Foundations, which represents about 2,000 foundations, states: “In carrying out their philanthropic activities, our members embrace both the letter and spirit of the law. Our members seek diversity and inclusiveness in order to reflect the communities they serve and to ensure that a range of perspectives contribute to the common good and the development of their mission in a changing society.”
  • Similarly, the Foundation Center, a research organization that collects information on grant makers, states: “Transparency and accountability are key to earning the public trust.”
  • And Independent Sector, which represents charities and foundations, advises “open and timely sharing of financial, governance, and program information.”

If Emmett’s right that these “words lose all meaning unless these organizations speak forcefully to the dangers inherent in the Florida law,” then where are the voices of the Council on Foundations, Foundation Center, and Independent Sector in speaking out against this legislation? To be clear, I certainly agree with Emmett that “government should not be in the business of deciding who sits on foundation boards or which nonprofit organizations receive grants based on demographics.” But we have to also realize that:

…the idea that government is prohibited from requesting diversity data as it relates to board composition, staffing, and nonprofit grantees undermines the promise that foundations have made to the American public that they are committed to diversity, inclusiveness, accountability, and transparency in their operations.

There’s no way that it’s a good look for foundations to spend their time trying to figure out how to avoid being transparent about diversity. Indeed, officials at the National Committee for Responsible Philanthropy (NCRP) say the Florida law “takes institutional philanthropy in the wrong direction” and that the grantmakers involved in the advocacy to get this law passed could have spent that time and human capital on issues of real concern to the nonprofit sector. I agree.

This law and efforts to pass it demonstrate that foundation priorities are misguided and myopic. There are high resource and opportunity costs associated with the law’s passage – time, money and human capital that could have been spent in better ways was instead squandered to promote this irrelevant legislative effort. Grantmakers who funded this effort could, for example, have boosted grantees’ operational reserves or expanded programs to serve those most disadvantaged in our communities. Funder associations could have spent their time educating their members about how to better meet community needs, lobbying for better financial regulation to protect foundation assets from future threats or building member capacity. This is particularly relevant because foundation assets have taken a serious hit and continue to feel the effects of the recession. Protecting philanthropic assets would seem to be a significantly higher priority than preemptively blocking sunshine legislation.

What’s becoming clearer to me is that all foundations are not created equal, and many of them could care less about being accountable to walk their diversity talk. But for the foundation leaders that truly do care about diversity in their profession, the Florida legislation should come as a huge slap in the face. Especially for people like David Waldman, Vice President of Human Resources and Administration for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), who recently shared his experiences with RWJF to change ”the culture of the Foundation to make diversity much more a part of the fabric of who we are as a working community”:

Whatever we have done, successful or not, we have not let our intentional focus on diversity diminish. It has remained unwavering through leadership transitions, high-profile attention to other work, and other potential distractions. We never stopped paying attention. We may not have done things in the “right order” (we just published our broad-based diversity statement on our website this year), but we have created a culture where diversity is part of the ongoing discussion at all levels of our work.

High profile infrastructure groups like the Council on Foundations, Foundation Center, and Independent Sector have been encouraging foundations to adopt diversity policies and statements for years now. RWJF is just one example of an organization that’s heeded its advice. So why aren’t these organizations speaking out about this nonsense going down in Florida? Why did the reputable members of the Florida Philanthropic Network like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Bank of America, Wachovia, and the Jesse Ball duPont Fund attach their names to this harmful advocacy effort?

Obviously, I’ve got more questions than answers to what’s happening in philanthropy these days. For now, what we have is an ill-advised piece of legislation with no public opposition to it from within the philanthropic community save for foundation watchdog NCRP and the fearless Emmett Carson.

But then, Orson Aguilar, executive director of the Greenlining Institute, a California group that has backed legislation in the state to compel foundations to disclose information about their diversity practices, may have put it best.

“They must be really ashamed of their diversity practices if they have gone a step forward in creating regulation that basically gives them the right to discriminate.”

What do you make of all this? Are some foundations really against diversity or just afraid to show that they’re spending all this money thinking about it and not making any real progress? Do you agree with Emmett Carson that “the Florida law will inevitably undermine public support for philanthropy?”

Filed Under: Philanthropy · Tagged With: , , , , ,

Race to the Top or Running in Place? The Pathway to Becoming a Foundation CEO

April 25, 2010 by · Leave a Comment

What is the pathway to becoming a foundation CEO? Last year, the Council on Foundations addressed that very question by releasing an enlightening report titled, Career Pathways to Philanthropic Leadership 2009 Baseline Report, which examined the professional and individual characteristics of 440 foundation and grantmaking executives who were appointed during a five-year period (2004-2008).  Today, at EPIP’s National Conference, we hear from Renee Branch from the Council as well as Donna Bransford from DNB Strategic Consulting.

The baseline report revealed an eye-opening view of what the pathway to philanthropic leadership really looks like. One thing is clear: most foundation CEOs are not program officers who have advanced to the top position.

Foundation CEOs are White People Over the Age of 41

Not surprisingly,  81 percent of foundation CEOs  hired from 2004-2008 were white. As far as gender, the hires were pretty split 50/50 amongst males and females. Again, not surprisingly, 88 percent of foundation CEOs were over 41. Fewer than 5 percent were under the age of 31.

When the Council looked at current foundation CEOs, they found that the age was even higher. Over 70% of current foundation leaders are over 50. And given the economy and the desire for older leaders to continue in this work, we really don’t know when or even if they will retire. To compound this uncertainty, 79 percent of the foundations don’t even have succession plans in place.

Most Foundations Hire From the Outside

Out of over 400 foundation CEOs hired from 2004-2008, only 20 percent of them were hired from within. Which means that 80 percent were hired from outside the foundation. Where did they come from, you ask? Well, most foundation CEOs had already been a CEO in another industry. Over 70 percent of them came from completely outside of the foundation field – primarily from business or from nonprofits.

Advanced Education and Professional Development are Key

The foundation CEOs surveyed shared the types of professional development that helped them move forward in their careers. 46 percent listed board service as an asset to their leadership. 76 percent had participated in professional development, with women more likely to have participated in trainings and workshops.

In addition, advanced education proved a key success factor for foundation CEO hires. In particular, education seemed to be even more important when it came to leaders of color. 92 percent of black foundation CEOs have a Master’s degree, while 100% of Hispanics and Asians possess a Master’s. On the flipside, only 78 percent of white foundation CEOs have a Master’s degree.

Executive Search Firms are a Gift and a Curse

The Council’s report found that 45 percent of foundation CEO hires were managed by a search firm. On the one hand, the search firms were credited with bringing forth a more racially diverse pool of candidates. But on the other hand, the search firm approach tends to look for a “rockstar” from outside the foundation world to present to trustees as part of the recruitment process. So you have to wonder, is this why foundations aren’t hiring from within?

Overall, the Council’s research makes the “race to the top” look more like running in place for current foundation staff who want to advance to the top job as CEO. It may be a harsh reality, but the numbers say: it ain’t happening. No way, no how.

Filed Under: 2010 EPIP National Conference, Leadership, Philanthropy, Professional Development · Tagged With: , , , ,

We’re Not in a Post-Racial World: ABFE’s Commitment to Future Black Leaders

May 3, 2009 by · 2 Comments

Every seat was filled in the room at the Association of Black Foundation Executives‘ (ABFE) 2009 James A. Joseph Lecture Series and Award Ceremony in Atlanta. In fact, conference organizers had to add rows of extra seats just to accommodate all of the people who wanted to join this important conversation and celebration of black philanthropy. ABFE was the first affinity group for people of color at the Council of Foundations. The Joseph Lecture kicks off the first day of ABFE’s annual programming at the Council’s Annual Conference. This year’s theme: Change in Generational Leadership: Past, Present and the Future of Philanthropy. Susan Taylor Batten is the new President of ABFE. The audience gave a rousing round of applause as she took the stage to introduce herself. Everyone is so excited to have Susan as the new leader of ABFE.  See a short video clip of Susan expressing her excitement about this year’s conference:

Dr. Beverly Tatum, President of Spelman College, provided opening remarks. Dr. Tatum said: “You don’t need me to tell you that the percentage of resources directed to minority organizations is tiny. Millions of dollars go to heavily endowed organizations – dollars that could do so much at Spelman, Morehouse, Tuskegee.” Spelman just celebrated 128 years, established in 1881. The magic of philanthropy – where two white women started a college for black women in Atlanta. The Rockefeller family decided to help. The college started with that gift and was named after Laura Spelman Rockefeller. When we think about what’s happening today around the theme of change and generational leadership – we’re cultivating the next generation of black leaders. That’s why historically black colleges are still relevant. But there is a major concern: we’re at risk of losing a generation of college students. Students who need loans and grants to fund their education. Nothing is more disastrous than for students to start an education, incur debt, then have to return home without their degrees. View a short video clip of Dr. Tatum discussing the importance of supporting education for our future leaders:

Loren Harris, formerly at the Ford Foundation also gave opening remarks. He was hailed for his leadership on the foundation’s agenda of improving outcomes for black men and boys.  Loren said: “We have the challenge of raising the bar to help black men and boys understand that education has nothing to do with whiteness.” Our First Family provides a high profile example of what it means to be successful. That reality has to be made tangible for the ordinary black men who for them, this success is as far as the moon. We have a much higher rate of black women attending college than black men. We have dismal statistics and we know young men who need mentoring and unconditional love. Leadership is rooted in love. Dr. King had love, passion, vision. Made sacrifices because of a deep-seated love for his people. We as a people sacrifice our time, talent, and treasure. We’re at a critical juncture, where the bar has been raised, and our generation’s challenge is still being defined. Our young men have an absence of unconditional love – when they make mistakes, they are punished harshly. The people who keep our communities safe give them a “go to jail card.” The odds are high that one mistake can derail a young black man’s entire life trajectory. We have a will to act in concert, to do work together on these issues and we can’t allow our institutions to be barriers to our success.

Rahsaan Harris, Program Executive at Atlantic Philanthropies was the recipient of the Emerging Leader in Philanthropy. Rahsaan said: “This work is much bigger than any of us as individuals. Don’t get it twisted. Racialized outcomes show that we are not in a post-racial world.”

Southern Partners Fund was the recipient of the Institutional Award for Philanthropic Leadership. The Fund’s President, Janine E. Lee shared her thoughts: One-third of the country is in the south. We have the highest levels of hate crimes, unemployment, and dropout levels in the south. Lots of potential for leadership and accomplishment is never realized. We have opportunity now to live up to the promise of democracy. My call to you: lead from the inside out. Ask questions about why such a small percentage of resources is going into rural communities to support young leaders and effect social change in the south. As Martin Luther King, Jr. has said: “Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary.”

Amina Dickerson, Senior Director of Global Community Involvement for Kraft Foods, was selected as ABFE’s eighteenth James A. Joseph Lecturer.  Amina announced in February 2009 that she was stepping down as the philanthropic leader of Kraft Foods, taking the opportunity to introduce Nicole Robinson as her successor. Many seasoned and emerging leaders have sought out insight on the process that she and Nicole went through to come to this effective succession. Amina spoke on the theme of “Building Bridges of Opportunities: Succession Planning for OUR Next Generation.” Now is the time for our field to implement with intent the stewardship of next generation leadership. We have to take the steps to cultivate them for success. Backdrop of Obama’s first 100 days finds the nation in the most troubling time in recent decades. Health, housing, education have shortages of resources and offers philanthropy a daunting state of affairs. Calls for action come at a time of the graying of our sector – with baby boomers giving way to generational change. The shift has already begun. In 1982, we had 300,000 charities, in 2008 about 1.2 million. Bridgespan Group says we will need hundreds of thousands of new leaders. View a short video message from Amina herself:

How can we support leadership development?  Amina highlighted the work of Council on Foundations, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, ABFE and others who have made investments, and now is the time to invigorate this with intention.

  • Offer leaders tangible opportunities to build leadership skills. Next generation views history from different perspectives, and need to forge their own path. They can only do that when given the authority to do so.
  • Develop “bench strength” through training and stretch assignments.
  • Help them identify their own ambitions and their own strengths.
  • “Don’t replace you with yourself” when thinking about succession planning. Amina told upper management why she thought Nicole should be her successor and sold her within the company.
  • Throw your potential successor in the deep end of the pool; you’ll be surprised at how well they swim.
  • You have to work as a team with your successor. She and Nicole began work of transition together. Hired someone to coach Nicole into the role as well as coach Amina out of the role.
  • Recognize the human role in transition – need to maintain mutual respect. When you’re uncomfortable, talk about it and work it out.

Amina stressed the need for bold voices in our field. Young people enter the discussion from different perspectives with youth, intelligence, determination, an open heart. ABFE can talk about career paths for their members  – what do younger generations need to get to higher posts? How can each of us be invested in their development?

  • Foster an ongoing intergenerational dialogue – invite young leaders to be present and active in important conversations.
  • Ensure that risk-taking is not punished, but critiqued.
  • Develop support systems for those stepping down to make room for the next generation. It’s hard for leaders to leave when they have no idea what’s possible after that. Consider sabbaticals, paid leave of absences, etc.
  • In everything we do, we should always strive to serve as intermediaries and use our agency to move philanthropic support toward our communities.

Full disclosure: ABFE hired me to provide blogging services for this event to leverage the power of social media for their members and to share their story with the wider philanthropic community. The views expressed here are solely my own, however, and I stand by my commitment to authentic coverage of these issues. Would you like to hire me? Visit my portfolio to see samples of my work.

Filed Under: ABFE 2009, African Americans, Council on Foundations 2009, Leaders of Color, Philanthropy, Social Media · Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Next Page »
Loading...
Sign up for blog updates and get a FREE chapter of my book, How to Become a Nonprofit Rockstar!