Resources on Teaching Philanthropy
In July 2009, the Upstate Institute hosted a series of conversations about philanthropy and the nonprofit sector. These conversations, which are summarized below, represent an investment in ourselves as educators and scholars of philanthropy. Our intent with this website is to provide a new, cost-effective venue for scholars and educators of philanthropy to learn about the field, and bring issues of philanthropy, not for profit organization, and civil society, into our curriculum.
Our first conversation, which took place on July 16, 2009, focused on the history and scholarship of philanthropy, featured: - James Allen Smith, Vice President and Director of Research and Education, Rockefeller Archive Center
- David Hammack, Hiram C. Haydn Professor of History at Case Western Reserve University
- Ellen Percy Kraly, William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor of Geography and Director of the Upstate Institute at Colgate University.
The second conversation was held on July 17, 2009, and focused on regional philanthropy and featured:
The final conversation took place on April 29, 2010, between Mike Goorhouse, program associate for Community Foundations in Youth and the Council of Michigan Foundations; Daniel Cavazos, '10 and member of the Student Philanthropy Council at Colgate, and Julie Dudrick, project director for the Upstate Institute.
Videos
July 16, 2009: The History and Scholarship of Philanthropy
The Scholarship of Philanthropy
The conversation begins with a consideration of the history of philanthropy and the not for profit sector. Smith begins at the Middle Ages, a time in which societies in the midst of commercial and urban revolution were creating institutions to deal with issues of disease. Hammack begins with an illustration of how not for profit organizations came about as ways to put first amendment freedoms into action, and ways to organize activity around religious and cultural impulses, rather than with the approval of legislature or a majority. Smith notes a renewed interest in the philanthropic sector in the last two decades, largely due an understanding of what large fortunes, such as that of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, have accomplished. Hammack notes that, while there has been an expansion of interest in giving, not for profit organizations to which much of this giving is directed have not expanded because of this giving, but because of government funding. While giving has remained steady at about 2%, employment in the not for profit sector has risen to about 10% of the national workforce. Smith wants to make an effort to understand the scale of this sector, and asks how we measure the contribution of the undercompensated artist to the cultural sector, or the time given from volunteers and board members. We assume that the not for profit sector is 9% of GDP, but this doesn’t measure all of the contributions that this sector makes. Hammack says that when we use the term “philanthropic” we often mean large gifts from people with large stocks of money, but there are subsectors to the field as well, such as people who accept a smaller salary in order to do work that contributes to society.
Analytic Themes in Philanthropy and Not for profit Scholarship
This section focuses on how we study these sectors, and what we are not studying in the sectors. Hammack says that though the field is large and complicated, there has been special emphasis in the last several years on race, class and gender, and the relation between charitable organizations and the history of racial oppression in America. There is also a good deal of writing about missions and religious affiliation in charitable activity. Smith considers the growing awareness that philanthropic and not for profit institutions touch virtually every area of our public life, and have shaped public policy. Hammack and Smith also discuss the reach of American philanthropy, and illustrate, with several historical examples, how philanthropic institutions often move across borders.
Public and Private Connection
This section addresses the connections between public and private sectors. Hammack begins with questions of community, especially religious communities and the support they provide. Smith adds the idea that the not for profit sector is diverse enough to provide several approaches to problems, and even diverse ways of defining problems. He says that this sector is central to the democratic experiment. Hammack says that the civil rights movement provided a turning point, and led the courts to rethink the public purpose of voluntary associations and nonprofit organizations.
Emerging Trends and Forces of Change in Scholarship and Cultural Policy
Section Four looks at trends in the scholarship of philanthropy in the next century, and how to engage our students in this scholarship. Smith says that, since at least 1989, as the movements to erode Soviet authority got off the ground, the term “civil society” has been reintroduced in American discourse. This recent global awareness of civil society has generated much new scholarship and research. Hammack says that another dimension of that work has to do with the legal framework under which NGOs operate in other parts of the world, and both he and Smith share examples from other countries in which the law has a different view of organizations outside the state. They also discuss the community foundation movement, in which modest resources can unite to benefit the local communities.
Scale
This is a discussion of scale: national issues being addressed at the regional level as well as the local community foundation model. Kraly mentions that this form of philanthropy has been adapted in Europe and other areas, and Smith mentions that several networks are studying this by bringing together practitioners and scholars. Hammack talks about the relationship between philanthropic research and practice, and how they are so intertwined.
Fitting Giving into Curriculum
Kraly begins by connecting this study of civil society, philanthropy and not for profit organization, all of which can be called “giving,” to the study of liberal arts, western traditions and the emergence of modern society. We can take these issues and imbed them into our core curriculum as we are training students in critical skills. Smith notes that the recent teaching about philanthropy and civil society has most often been at the graduate level, which gives it a practical, professional thrust, while there has not been a focus on this at the undergraduate level. Hammack adds that there have been a few initiatives from colleges and universities to introduce a more reflective dimension to student service learning. One approach to bringing this into the curriculum is through a classroom experience within a discipline; another would be to engage students in service learning and reflection, which might not necessarily happen in a course.
Engagement of Students
This section provides a discussion of creating space within the curriculum for reflection and engagement. Kraly begins by pointing out that one must begin by asking the right questions, and must have developed the right skills to provide solutions. She says we need to think about how to invest in our students so they can enter the world, solve problems and give appropriately and strategically of themselves. Smith says that he always begins with language, which is so important in order to give undergraduate students a legal and historic framework for philanthropic work. Hammack, who has worked with both graduates and undergraduates in a nonprofit leadership program, sees a wide range of what students bring and what they are looking for, which creates a multitude of challenges to engage each student. He encourages among students an increasing awareness of the need to learn about different perspectives, and how often students can learn these perspectives from each other. He also encourages students to learn across various fields as well. Finally, he encourages students to use their educational background and experience to contextualize and ask questions. Smith thinks it’s important to incorporate historical texts into the curriculum, and to read these classical texts with a focus on the gift relationship. Kraly ends with an illustration of how Richard Titmuss’ The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy, which focuses on blood donation as an illustration of connecting issues of giving to public health policy.
July 17: Regional Philanthropy
This discussion is hosted by Emily Katz, a Class of 2009 graduate of Colgate University, who completed an Upstate Institute fellowship on the effectiveness of the Youth Philanthropy Project at Colgate. She talks with:
Dunn explains that the Central New York Community Foundation receives, distributes and manages charitable funds, and is the largest grantmaking foundation in the region, with assets of about $90 million. Sixty percent of their funds are legacy funds, while the rest are designated for specific purposes or advised by individuals or families who use them as a vehicle for their own philanthropy in their community. O’Shea says the Community Foundation for Herkimer and Oneida Counties focuses on growing gifts made to them through prudent investing and returning that money to the community in the form of grants. Brown says the Community Foundation for South Central New York is the smallest and youngest of the three represented foundations, and has assets of $13 million, They cover a large (six county), rural area and focus on community convening on issues of importance to the community as well as funding. Dunn says their role is to expand charitable capital in the region, to focus and collaborate with other institutions to impact change collectively, and to assist nonprofits with their own capacity. O’Shea agrees, and says CF are charged with knowing about the partners, players and issues in their community. They should be the knowledge center in the community, which helps them decide what to do in the leadership role in the community. Brown thinks of CF as community based in every way—grants are made to community organizations, funds come from community donors and grants are determined by panels of community members.
Needs in the Region
Dunn says that their discretionary grants have historically been broad, while they have focused on significant issues in the community like literacy. Presently, they are looking at collaborations and partnerships, in order to encourage and help not for profit organizations work toward regionalization, in order to address sustainability. They are also seeing a movement from project based funding to general operating grants, which are similar to venture capital investment. O’Shea sees change coming, and is especially aware of literacy issues. Her organizations recently partnered with a coalition of organizations to apply for a $600,00 state grant for adult literacy. They also gave themselves a grant to fund literacy research, which is unusual. They have also created a leadership fund, to be used in partnership with their discretionary grantmaking, and will soon do an indicator study to determine needs in the community and how best to address them in a strategic way. Brown says her organization is looking at all of those issues as well, and is especially interested in convening groups to address specific situations in their community, such as the ongoing response to the 2006 floods in the region and the American Civic Association tragedy in Binghamton earlier this year.
Dunn says that Central New York has a modest foundation community, with only $400 million in assets and $20 million in annual grants. With those funds, how can we have the most impact. He has seen many encouraging conversations about sustainability in not for profit organizations in the community, and discussions about merging, sharing objectives, and regionalization. O’Shea says that, as the largest funder in their area, several smaller foundations have come under their umbrella as donor advised or designated funds. This enables them to have a conversation about their interests and the impact of their charitable dollars. She also stresses the importance of the indicator study as a way to articulate the needs of the community to themselves and the community. Brown does the same thing by relying on other agencies to give them this information. They are concerned with the power differential and remind themselves to remain sensitive about this. She shares an example of a cultural organization that has systemic issues. They also discuss the definition of philanthropy and the creation of the Center for Philanthropy by the Central New York Community Foundation.
Programming for Youth in Philanthropy
Dunn says he has seen several different models, many of which have been done in community foundations, for encouraging the next generation to become engaged in philanthropy. The Central New York Community Foundation focused on the local school district to instill in the students ideas of civic engagement, and recently have taken some time to consider how to restructure the program. O’Shea often works with parents or grandparents in donor advised funds and encourages them to do site visits as a family, to witness first-hand the activity essential to a civil society, and to think about philanthropic decisions as family decisions. Brown has seen both models, and knows that several of her board members are concerned about engaging young people in family philanthropy. She also talks about the Youth Philanthropy Council from Colgate at Norwich High School, and with Binghamton University’s philanthropy project. They fund the grantmaking piece with Chenango United Way and NBT Bank, and will continue in order to get a sense of the impact of the programs. Finally, O’Shea shares a story about a grandfather who instills philanthropic skills in his grandchildren.
April 29, 2010: Youth in Philanthropy
The Upstate Institute hosted Mike Goorhouse for a discussion on youth in philanthropy with Daniel Cavazos, '10, former member of the Student Philanthropy Council, and Julie Dudrick, project director.
This conversation begins with a discussion of how community foundations across the state of Michigan engage youth in philanthropy. Mike discusses the importance of encouraging young people to articulate their passion for a cause through philanthropic support, which is defined as the giving of time, talent and treasure.
Mike discusses how an organization or foundation might begin to engage young people in community involvement and community change. Mike explains that these programs are disconnected from their schools, and are connected into the larger community instead. That community-oriented atmosphere combined with the grantmaking expertise that the community foundations brought to the table. However, community foundations didn't understand how to engage young people. The Kellogg Foundation, therefore, provided technical assistance and training about youth empowerment. These meetings are led by the youth themselves, and begin to consider what is the role of a nonprofit, and how the youth can make a difference. The three core compentencies of a youth program are community service, grantmaking, and fund development.
This section provides a discussion of the framework for a Youth Advisory Committee in a community foundation. Community foundations, as county based organizations, are interested in engaging young people in the grantmaking process, and in using this as a way to broaden their reach about their work. Students involved in the program appreciate the opportunity to participate in a decision-making process, and welcome the chance to participate in a well-known and strong community program that makes a difference. Many of the students have participated in programs funded by a YAC in the past, so they appreciate the opportunity to give back to that program.
This section is a discussion of how youth participating in a youth advisory council work to ensure that they are responsive to the critical issues of other young people in their area. Mike discusses how they identify those critical issues, and how they measure their effectiveness in addressing those issues.
This section is a discussion of community service, which is another cornerstone of a successful Youth Advisory Committee. This activity, which is required of members, is a part of the decision-making process for each YAC.