QUESTION:
Identify three types of foundations and discuss the roles these types of foundations play in philanthropy. What are the arguments offered against the value of foundations? Your answer must have at least two citations and corresponding references – one from the relevant course text, and one from an academic journal article published within the past 5 – 7 years.
The Philanthropy Reader by Michael Moody and Beth Breeze
- “Leaders of foundation – usually a staff of professionals guided by a board of trustees – provide funds from the foundation’s income or endowment to support not-for-profit organizations, charities, or other programs and organizations in accordance with the mission designated by the founder” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 338)
- First role – Driver
- Rockefeller Foundation – drove the Green Revolution which launched in 1945. It helped develop new varieties of grains in particular climates and help alleviate the lack of adequate food in certain communities. The key to maintaining a focused pursuit of the objective of increased grain yields and to implementing the strategy as rapidly as possible (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 339)
- “Pursuing specific objectives according to a strategy they develop and whose implementation they guide” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 339)
- “When a particular social, economic, or cultural goal can be visualized clearly and a practical strategy can be developed to attain it, a foundation may choose to play the role of Driver.” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 338)
- “When a foundation can define and limit a problem, and believes that it can map a strategy for solving the problem, then the Driver role may be appropriate, especially when no other institution can play that role as well or as faithfully as the foundation” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 339)
- Second role – Partner
- Bill and Melinda Gates foundation – had a specific goal to achieve and a strategy that “involved funding the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa” (Nally & Taylor, 2015)
- “The Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, and the Broad Foundation all contributed to the growth and development of charter schools.” (Levine, 2015).
- “The foundation shares the power to shape a strategy and makes crucial decisions together with other partner organizations, making grants to support those organizations as well as others that simply implement that strategy” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 338)
- “The partner foundation shares control and accountability with the grant-receiving organization” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 340)
- “The role of Partner is likely to be appropriate whenever a foundation has a strategic objective that can be accomplished by working with an existing, usually non profit organization that shares with the foundation both the goal and the strategy for attaining it” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 340)
- “The role of Partner is generally more cost-effective for the foundation than that of Driver, demanding less commitment of time and energy by the foundation’s staff.” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 340)
- “Most foundations choose to operate as Partners, and not just as a way of saving energy, time, and money.” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 340)
- Third role – Catalyst
- “When tackling a problem for which a strategy is inconceivable, inappropriate, or premature, a foundation may make grants to organizations that generally deal with the problem, without specifying or expecting particular outcomes” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 338)
- “Lower commitment grants in which the foundation restricts itself to the role of Catalyst, scattering resources like Johnny Appleseed in hopes that some of the initiatives supported will bear fruits” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 341)
- “The Catalyst role may seem less impressive than the grandly strategic roles of Driver or Partner. The Catalyst is unlikely ever to receive a Nobel Prize for its efforts. Yet the role of Catalyst is important for foundations to fill.” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 341)
- “The central force promoting the creation of these valuable social institutions was a foundation” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 337)
- “There are thousands of foundations actively working for the betterment of society here in the U.S. and around the world. And behind each foundation stands a wealthy individual or family that chose to declare “enough is enough”, and then gave away a significant portion of wealth for the benefit of the wider community rather than hoard it, invest it, or spend even more of it on personal pleasures” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 337)
- “Foundations enable the creation of countless civic-sector organizations – groups dealing with human rights, civil liberties, social policy experimentation, public advocacy, environmental protection, knowledge generation, human capital building, and service delivery, among other causes – and assist them in building national, regional, and local constituencies that move into the forefront of continuing social change” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 338)
- “Foundations play significant social roles, although their specific form and function varies – like other expressions of philanthropic impulse – across cultural, historical, and national contexts” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 316)
- “In many societies foundations enjoy a privileged status as valued institutions” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 316)
- “While foundations exist for the primary purpose of philanthropic giving, corporations exist for the primary purpose of creating wealth and profit.” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 317)
- “Foundations have been political “gatekeepers”, funding the movement initiatives that were successfully translated into public policy and institutional reforms” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 348)
- What are the arguments offered against the value of foundations?
- “When a social problem is not discrete and well-bounded, when it permeates large segments of society, or when it is created in part by dug-in interest groups, a foundation can usually do little to solve the problem beyond ameliorating some of its symptoms and suggesting through research or pilot programs some directions in which ultimate solutions may be found” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 341)
- “Foundations, especially in the U.S., are under attack from across the political spectrum – from various House and Senate committees, government agencies, advocates for the nonprofit sector, and from within their own ranks” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 343)
- “Foundations are suffering the effects of abuse and mismanagement by a minority, as well as criticisms that they have become “flabby” and ‘complacent’”(Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 343)
- “Foundations in other countries, such as the UK and Australia, are facing similar and growing demands for greater oversight and accountability, even though the particular issues may be different” (Moody & Breeze, 2016, p. 343)
https://www-sciencedirect-com.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/science/article/pii/S096262981500027XThe politics of self-help: The Rockefeller Foundation, philanthropy and the ‘long’ Green Revolution
- “The Rockefeller Foundation promoted rural development projects that deliberately sought to ‘emancipate’ the tradition-bound peasant, transforming him or her into a productive, enterprising subject” (Nally & Taylor, 2015)
- “However, more modestly we can note that the politics of ‘self-help’ remains a key pillar of contemporary Rockefeller Foundation philanthropy, most conspicuously through its on-going partnership with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in funding the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) initiated in 2006.” (Nally & Taylor, 2015)
Nally, D., & Taylor, S. (2015). The politics of self-help: The Rockefeller Foundation, philanthropy and the ‘long’ Green Revolution. Political Geography, 49, 51–63. doi: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2015.04.005
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=f7c6cb77-b32b-41cf-8a47-60ef4af1ff5b%40sdc-v-sessmgr03
Levine, Murray. 2016. “Andrew Carnegie and Bill Gates: Philanthropy and Oligarchy, Then and Now.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 86 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1037/ort0000150.