Program on Philanthropy and Social Innovation (PSI)
Program on Philanthropy and Social Innovation (PSI)
Report #151: March 2009
Report #151: March 2009
|
Editor's note: This report focuses primarily on the recession's impact on foundations and the nonprofits they support, and flags the following efforts to adapt:
As each sector seeks leverage and efficiency, the opportunity for each is to coalesce around shared goals, and work together for the public good in the toughest of times. This is the central thrust of a series of meetings being held by Aspen's Program on Philanthropy and Social Innovation, as well as the April 22-24 Global Philanthropy Forum. And it is central to the "Declaration" of Johns Hopkins University's Listening Post project. -Jane Wales, Vice President, Philanthropy and Society |
Strategies for Social Sector Practice
1.FOUNDATIONS SEEK TO
WEATHER ECONOMY, SUSTAIN SUPPORT; STONESIFER ARGUES FOR TRIMMING
ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGETS; ONE OBSERVER ASSERTS GRANTMAKERS ARE ‘HOARDING'
INSTEAD
Foundations across the country and around the world
are seeking ways to weather the economic recession and sustain support for
the social sector. According to Patty Stonesifer, former CEO of the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation, foundations should trim administrative
expenses just as their grantees are being forced to do. In an interview
with Thomas J. Tierney of the Bridgespan Group, Stonesifer said that
grantmakers should engage in "belt-tightening, no matter what the
circumstances are, in order to be aligned with those you're trying to
partner with."
There are also reports that local and regional foundations are altering course to help in this troubled economy, by reducing administrative costs and maintaining or even increasing payout rates despite significantly decreased assets. Grantmaking members of Chicago's Donors Forum, for example, expressed their commitment to maintain funding levels as much as possible this year and to streamline the proposal process so as to create efficiencies for grantseekers and grantmakers alike. In its Economic Outlook 2009, the forum reported that at least one in three respondents to its survey expected to increase support for grantees' general operations this year, among other strategies to address nonprofit sustainability and capacity issues.
However, one observer argues that some foundations are "hunkering down and hoarding." Todd Cohen of the Philanthropy Journal writes in a Feb. 25 post to the Stanford Social Innovation Review blog that the "giving sector" is betraying its purpose in the worst economic times since the Great Depression. Nonprofits and foundations are failing to work together or pool resources to address growing economic and social problems. And foundations are "continuing to pitch a fit" as critics call on them to increase their payout rate. Cohen says greater regulation of foundations is needed, and nonprofit leaders need to muster the courage to push foundations to use more of their wealth to strengthen the operations of NGOs and serve more people in a time of rising need.
2. STUDIES: THIS RECESSION
HITTING NONPROFITS QUICKER THAN THOSE IN THE PAST, PROVOKING INCREASED
TALK, CONSIDERATION OF MERGERS
Based on a recent survey
of nonprofit leaders, the Bridgespan Group believes the effects of the
troubled economy are being felt more quickly and more severely by the
sector than was the case in past recessions. Conducted in November, this
survey found 52 percent of respondents had already seen their funding cut
– the percentage was 48 percent among those whose funding comes primarily
from foundations – and a quarter of respondents had seen steep cuts of
more than 20 percent.
In another survey conducted in February, Bridgespan found that 20 percent of nonprofit leaders think mergers could play a role in how they respond to the economic downturn. Bridgespan, a nonprofit consultancy, released a report with details about the survey along with lessons for nonprofits interested in pursuing mergers and acquisitions, and for funders interested in supporting those processes, which it says can improve quality, efficiency, knowledge and expertise. Nonprofit M&A: More than A Tool for Tough Times reports that not all areas of the sector will benefit equally from mergers, and that it's not a panacea for all of the challenges facing nonprofits. The report recommends that foundations help create a marketplace through which nonprofits can explore potential merger options in a non-threatening way. The report cautions against rushing into merger agreements too quickly and argues that nonprofits must have a full understanding of the strategic rationale and its suitability for the deal. In a Jan. 6 discussion on the Chronicle of Philanthropy's website, philanthropy consultant and academic Richard Marker noted the difficulty involved in nonprofit mergers and suggested that nonprofits that are considering merging, but lack experience in sharing services or collaboration, should start by trying that first.
3. NCRP CREATES CHALLENGING
BENCHMARKS TO HELP FOUNDATIONS MAXIMIZE IMPACT AS WELL AS SPUR GREATER
SELF-REGULATION
Foundations should provide at least 50 percent
of grant dollars to benefit marginalized groups – broadly defined to
include minorities, women and the aging – and at least 25 percent of grant
dollars for advocacy and organizing. Those are the two lead benchmarks out
of 10 developed by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy to
help funders "maximize their impact and best serve nonprofits." NCRP
established these benchmarks, reported in Criteria
for Philanthropy at Its Best: Benchmarks to Assess and Enhance Grantmaker
Impact, after 15 months of research, original data analysis and
debate among some 50 advisors. NCRP plans to highlight grantmakers that
exceed the benchmarks, which NCRP concedes are challenging, as well as
criticize "when appropriate" those funders that fall short. Ultimately,
the criteria (which address values, effectiveness, ethics and commitment)
are meant as a tool to spur meaningful self-regulation, but not intended
to spur a call for regulatory action; although the report does note that
increased government regulation is likely if grantmakers don't meet
societal needs. An interactive self-test for foundations of NCRP's
criteria is available online.
In addition to support for the marginalized and for advocacy, the report says grantmakers should pay out at least 6 percent of assets annually in grants, provide at least 50 percent of grant dollars for general operating support, and provide at least 50 percent of dollars as multi-year grants. They should also invest at least 25 percent of assets in ways that support the mission and maintain an engaged board of at least five people that offer a diversity of perspectives and are not compensated. Barely 16 percent of foundations meet NCRP's criteria on multi-year funding -- and that's the best percentage on all 10 criteria, the report finds, based on available data. Only about 7 percent of foundations currently meet its criteria for advocacy and organizing, according to the report.
4. RECESSION
REINFORCES NEED TO ENHANCE GIVING TO MINORITIES, CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION
COALITION SAYS
The economic downturn only reinforces the need
to find better ways to strengthen smaller, minority-led nonprofits,
according to a report from a group of California foundations. Strengthening
Nonprofit Minority Leadership and the Capacity of Minority-Led and Other
Grassroots Community-Based Organizations describes the
coalition's planning process and its initial grantmaking activities, as
well as specific information about each foundation's current grantmaking
and plans for new and enhanced activities to boost giving to minorities.
According to the report, participating foundations (which include the
California Endowment, the California Wellness Foundation, the William and
Flora Hewlett Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the
Weingart Foundation) will increase grant support to minority-led
nonprofits and other grassroots organizations to the tune of more than $20
million; provide more than $10 million to provide leadership training,
technical assistance and organizational capacity support to smaller,
minority-led nonprofits; and commit to research and analysis, including
evaluation of these new initiatives, to help better understand and
appropriately support the current state of minority leadership in the
state's nonprofit sector.
The coalition formed in response to state legislation that would have mandated more grantmaking to minority-led nonprofits. The legislation was eventually rescinded in large part because this coalition agreed to provide more funding for minority groups. The coalition has disbanded with publication of the report. The nonprofit advocacy group behind the legislation, the Greenlining Institute, has expressed in a post to its website disappointment in the small number of coalition foundations and the fact that the agreement only covers up to three years. More significantly, Greenlining finds the plan wanting since it's mostly focused on the needs of minority-led nonprofits and not on working to diversify the foundations themselves.
5. FOUNDATIONS SHOULD
WELCOME GREATER SCRUTINY, REGULARLY EVALUATE WHETHER THEY ADVANCE THE
PUBLIC GOOD, AND HELP ADDRESS GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR
Gara
LaMarche of the Atlantic Philanthropies has argued that foundations should
welcome scrutiny of their work, as well as take issues of racial and
ethnic impact into account in their grantmaking. With money tight and
times tough, and with the growing political empowerment of
African-American and Latino lawmakers across the country, LaMarche, said
in a speech
at Georgetown University that governmental scrutiny of and pressure on
philanthropy will intensify.
Martin C. Lehfeldt, former head of the affinity group Southeastern Council of Foundations agrees. Furthermore, he argues that the future of philanthropy will be tied to the way foundations respond to the widening gap between the rich and the poor. In Notes from A Non-Profitable Life: Reflections on My Journey across America's Charitable Landscape, a collection of articles and speeches, Lehfeldt suggests that every foundation board periodically discuss whether and how it is serving the public good, and define just what they consider the public good to be. That mission is the rationale for tax exempt status, he writes.
Further, foundations should not pay board members – or at least, not pay them much – for their service, for foundations would not support a nonprofit that compensated its board members. Lehfeldt compiled a list of what he says are preferred personal characteristics of foundation officials: humility, sensitivity, kindness, knowledge, entrepreneurship and passion. He also developed "Ten Commandments" for foundation trustees, the last three of which command board members to respect and strengthen the sector and its growth through encouraging and supporting better effectiveness and efficiency, engaging in regular scrutiny and evaluation of grantmaking, and helping seed new charitable-giving vehicles.
6. BOOK SAYS PRACTITIONERS,
RESEARCHERS PREOCCUPIED WITH HOW OF PHILANTHROPY, NOT WHY; TOO MUCH FOCUS
ON SKILLS, TECHNIQUES
The most common failing among those
attempting good works is to be too busy to reflect on things like ideas
and values; too busy to talk or read. And the most common fault among
those professionally engaged in philanthropy is their preoccupation with
the "how," while being neglectful, even ignorant, of the "why." In
Understanding Philanthropy: Its Meaning and Mission, scholars
Robert Payton and Michael Moody write that academic work in the field
suffers from a similar failing: the study of and training for "nonprofit
management," while essential and important, tends to gloss over the more
fundamental and critical questions about the practice of philanthropy. To
justify the continued existence of the field, Payton and Moody write that
scholars and practitioners need to present a more sophisticated
explanation of the unique contributions philanthropy makes or should make.
And the field needs to be considered "warts and all": confronting honestly
and fairly the bad as well as the good, the failures as well as the
successes.
7. REPORT QUANTIFIES
FOUNDATIONS’ VALUE TO SOCIETY: ALMOST $9 RETURNED FOR EVERY $1 GRANTED; AT
LEAST THREE TIMES THE LOSS IN TAXES
On average, every dollar
that private and community foundations offer in grants and support return
$8.58 in direct, economic welfare benefits to society – or some $367.9
billion in total, at least based on the $42.9 billion foundations provided
in grants in 2007. That's according to a study from the recently formed
D.C. advocacy group The
Philanthropic Collaborative, which seeks to generate research and
information to ensure policymakers see the value of the philanthropic
sector. Representatives from several foundations, including the Houston
Endowment and the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, are included on the
organization's Advisory Council along with those from various nonprofits
and associations, including the Council on Foundations and the
Philanthropy Roundtable.
Written by consultant and former Clinton Administration official Robert Shapiro and Aparna Mathur of American Enterprise Institute, the organization's report, The Social and Economic Value of Private and Community Foundations, provides what it describes as a broad analysis and approximate measure of foundations' value to American society, noting that it's only an initial effort, limited by the data that's available now. Its focus is on foundation giving, not assets, and the purpose is to show legislators that foundation and nonprofit activities generate substantially greater revenues than those foregone by tax-exempt status – at least three times the estimated loss in taxes. The authors posit that it would be a disservice to consider revoking the exemption.
8. FOUNDATIONS SHOULD BE
REQUIRED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF PRODUCING SOCIAL VALUE, SAYS CO-AUTHOR OF
SOCIAL INVESTING GUIDE
One philanthropy consultant argues that
at some point in the near future, foundations should be legally required
to show evidence that their grantmaking is producing social value. David
Hunter, of Hunter Consulting, made the comments in a Dec. 22 podcast
at the technology firm Social Solutions' ETOlutionist blog. He said the
model for such a requirement is the 15-year-old Government Performance
Results Act, which required that federal government programs be more
accountable for their work.
More foundations need to value using metrics to assess their work's social value and become more strategic with their giving in the first place. Hunter, a a founding member of the Working Group for Social Investing, co-wrote with Social Solutions' Steve Butz the Working Group's recently published Guide to Effective Social Investing. Foundations, they write, are rarely criticized for being "so inexplicably unsystematic and often undisciplined" when it comes to funding nonprofits – let alone threatened with legal consequences. But charity, or giving for giving's sake, is not good enough. Although it is clearly not easy for nonprofits to collect rigorous, quantitative data supporting claims of producing social value, the authors write that it is less difficult than many practitioners and funders in this sector believe. Funders need to let go of the concept of "charity" and focus on what the report calls pragmatic, unsentimental "social investing," which generally involves using rigorous selection criteria to choose grantees, structuring investments to strengthen grantees, tracking performance and offering non-financial support, keeping grant transaction costs to a minimum, and helping grantees build reliable revenue streams before ending their investment.
9.
NONPROFIT DISTINCTIVENESS NEEDS TO BE BETTER APPRECIATED; CAUTION AGAINST
TOO MUCH BUSINESS THINKING
There's been too much talk about
the philanthropic sector learning from and emulating business, and not
enough of a focus on the virtues of the sector itself – or even the
lessons it can impart to business. In a Jan. 13 op-ed
in the Financial Times, the Center for Effective Philanthropy's
Phil Buchanan wrote that the collapse and near-collapse of many large
companies in the past year is as good a sign as any that for-profits are
not necessarily more rigorous or more effective than nonprofits. Improving
nonprofit performance isn't a matter of just importing business practices
and acumen, since making money for shareholders is not the same as making
a positive social impact. Further, some problems that philanthropy seeks
to alleviate, such as climate change, are ones corporate interests helped
create in the first place. Buchanan says the nonprofit sector has not been
forceful enough in explaining its distinctiveness.
The Opportunity for Partnership and Leverage
10. ASPEN’S PROGRAM ON
PHILANTHROPY AND SOCIAL INNOVATION HOLDS SERIES OF CONVENINGS AMONG
PUBLIC, PRIVATE AND SOCIAL SECTOR LEADERS TO CONSIDER WAYS TO ADVANCE
SOCIAL GOALS
The Aspen Institute's Program on Philanthropy and
Social Innovation has launched a series of small "problem-solving
workshops" with policymakers, foundation officers and civic society
leaders. Recognizing that all sources of social innovation – be they from
the public, private, philanthropic or civic sectors – will be needed to
solve major societal problems, these workshops identify shared solutions
to specific societal problems; see if agreement can be found on a theory
of change and strategies that flow from that theory; and map out
opportunities for cross-sector partnerships. Finally – and importantly --
they seek shared measures of success.
The first workshop was held on March 4 with members of the incoming White House staff. It focused on a new mechanism for catalyzing giving and social investing so as to bring solutions to scale: the Obama administration's proposed Social Innovation Fund. The Social Innovation Fund would make grants to particularly effective programs that have emerged from the social sector. In its recommendations for the Fund, the group offered initial advice on mission, method and metrics, urging that the Social Innovation Fund must be inclusive, open to systems change in minority communities and across various regions; that it be able to demonstrate a new approach to achieving growth and leverage within the nonprofit marketplace; and that the innovations and results from funded projects should be shared in a central repository, enabling the public to use this information to further innovate.
11. THE AGA KHAN AND QUEEN
RANIA WILL BE AMONG THE FEATURED SPEAKERS AT THE GLOBAL PHILANTHROPY
FORUM; PHILANTHROPISTS TO FOCUS ON 5 CRISES THAT GOVERNMENTS CANNOT SOLVE
ALONE
The Aga Khan; Queen Rania of Jordan; philanthropists Mo
Ibrahim, Jean Case, Peter Buffett and entrepreneur Tom Siebel; Maria Otera
of Accion, World Bank Managing Director Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Hewlett
Foundation President Paul Brest, Rockefeller Brothers Fund President
Stephen Heintz, Skoll Foundation CEO Sally Osberg; Kenya's Equity Bank CEO
James Mwangi; ICICI's Machiket Mor, Geoffrey Canada of the Harlem
Children's Zone, and Van Jones of Green for All are among those who will
gather at the Global Philanthropy Forum in Washington DC on April 22-24.
Their focus will be on "Five Crises" facing political leaders that cannot
be solved by government alone. The agenda singles out poverty at home and
abroad, climate change, uneven access to quality education, uneven access
to health care, and the risk of state failure abroad in the wake of
conflict. And it features tested strategies that stem from the civic and
private sectors, which can be replicated or scaled.
12. DECLARATION, SIGNED BY
OVER 100 NONPROFIT LEADERS, CALLS FOR CROSS-SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS TO BOOST
CAPACITY OF ‘CITIZEN SECTOR’; CROSS-SECTOR COMMISSION
PROPOSED
According to a declaration signed by over 100
nonprofit leaders, foundations should collaborate with the federal
government on creating a "Citizen Sector Capacity-Building Initiative."
This would offer grants to nonprofits for staffing needs and technical
assistance, as well as seed-and-grow, innovative approaches to public
problems through a "Social Innovation Grant Program." Created by Johns
Hopkins University's Nonprofit Listening Post Project, Forward
Together: Empowering America's Citizen Sector for the Change We
Need calls on all sectors of society to step up to help what it
calls the citizen sector. The present economic crisis is an occasion to
rededicate the nation to the principles of joint responsibility and
concerted action that have long been the source of its strength, according
to the declaration. It also calls for a public-private Commission on
Cross-Sector Partnerships for America's Progress, as well as creating a
permanent institutional presence for the sector at all levels of
government. And it says organized philanthropy needs to offer greater
commitment to leveraging – as opposed to preserving – assets, fostering
innovation and taking risks.
The idea of a government Commission is, in fact, included in a less-noticed section of the Serve America Act, currently before the Senate. That bill proposes a Commission on Cross-Sector Solutions that would examine and recommend ways in which the federal government can interact more effectively with nonprofit and philanthropic organizations. The Commission would provide advice to the President and support research on a number of issues, including how government interacts with nonprofits and foundations to address national and local challenges, human capital needs facing the sector, and ways in which the federal government can improve the quality and timeliness of social sector data. The related House bill (H.R. 1388) however, does not include the creation of such a Commission.
13. RESEARCHER SAYS SOCIAL
ENTREPRENEURSHIP NEEDS TO BETTER DEFINE SUCCESS, BETTER REPORT FAILURE;
OFFERS IDEAS FOR FUNDERS
The field of social entrepreneurship
could easily collapse if it does not adopt a reasonable definition of
success that might give entrepreneurs more hope that they can make a
difference and researchers more opportunity to explore patterns in social
entrepreneurship. So says Paul Light of New York University and the
Brookings Institution, who further writes that if the field is to develop
better investment tools, it must look at investments that have failed to
glean lessons on barriers to success. In The
Search for Social Entrepreneurship, Light suggests that if
business entrepreneurship is any guide, failures in the field may outweigh
the successes by margins of four or five to one. Light understands why
there is what he calls a deep bias against failure – due to the vested
interest in showing such entrepreneurship actually brings about change and
adds value. But drawing lessons from relatively small, if inspiring,
samples of successes without matched samples of near successes and
outright failures doesn't advance the field, he says. Lacking a comparison
group of unsuccessful efforts and organizations makes it more difficult to
measure success or determine the best way to proceed.
Light calls principally for more research on social entrepreneurship to produce an evidence-based theoretical framework of what contributes to successful social entrepreneurship. Light also recommends that funders help entrepreneurs become less isolated and more engaged with each other, through education and fellowship programs. Entrepreneurs may be intuitive thinkers he says, but they could easily avoid mistakes by talking more often with peers. In addition, he says the search for entrepreneurial ideas should expand to include small-scale efforts at the neighborhood and community level. Too much entrepreneurial activity emphasizes broad geographic change, but there are thousands of organizations that pursue what he calls "pattern-breaking change" through much more focused efforts.
14. STUDY FINDS ‘WALK TRAILS
TALK’ IN GRANTMAKER SUPPORT OF WHAT NONPROFITS SAY THEY NEED: CHIEFLY
GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT
"Walk trails talk" in the push for
better grantmaking to address nonprofit needs, according to a report from
Grantmakers for Effective Organizations. Despite efforts at some
foundations to adopt more "nonprofit-friendly practices," there's a
pronounced disconnect between the ways in which grantmakers are supporting
nonprofits and what nonprofits say could contribute most to their success
– more general operating support, more multi-year support and a more
supportive, respectful relationship with grantees. Conducted by
Harder+Company Community Research, Is
Grantmaking Getting Smarter: A National Study of Philanthropic
Practice is the second-ever comprehensive study of the attitudes
and practices of staffed grantmaking foundations, building on a 2003 study
in partnership with the Urban Institute. GEO plans to conduct its next
survey on the subject in 2011.
Specifically, the survey reports that although most respondents gave some money to general operating support, they gave a median of just 20 percent of grant dollars in the area. And an overwhelming majority said they are not providing the funds needed to cover the overhead costs associated with funded projects. There's also a large disconnect between grantmakers' perception and the reality of the time nonprofits spend applying for and reporting on grants. A large reason for the misperception is the fact that very few respondents – just 12 percent – collect any information about how long it takes grantees to meet administrative requirements.
15. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR DISASTER
PREPAREDNESS ACROSS SECTORS IN D.C. AREA COULD BE MODEL FOR OTHER REGIONS;
OFFERS FOUNDATION TIPS
Too few nonprofits have completed even
basic plans for operating in and surviving a disaster, or what's called a
Continuity of Operations (COOP) plan. And until recently, nonprofits were
excluded from regional disaster preparedness exercises, or were included
in a limited way, without consideration of the full scope of resources
they provide. That's according to a strategic plan for the Washington,
D.C. area, which is touted as a model for other areas of the country in
better planning for crises that could emerge. Produced by the Nonprofit
Roundtable of Greater Washington, with research and analysis led by the
consultancy Deloitte LLP, A
Roadmap to Preparedness: Strategic Plan 2008-2011 seeks to
prepare the region to adequately respond to and recover from disaster
events through a partnership of nonprofits, government and the private
sector. But more broadly, it aims in part to help foundations engage with
nonprofits on issues concerning disaster preparedness, response and
recovery, and to help foundations direct their community investments most
effectively.
Among its overarching themes, the report says that information sharing and collaboration among nonprofits and with local governments are essential to meet citizens' needs, and that both nonprofits and government agencies need to establish points of contact to help coordinate information and resources. For any plan of any significance to be successful, an individual or entity must be charged with its oversight and execution.
Of Related Interest
Harvard Business Review: Support for Nonprofit Overhead Is Key to
Producing Results
Nonprofits and funders must break the "alarming
tendency" to underestimate what it costs to produce results in the sector
and face the reality that support for overhead is key, according to
leaders of the nonprofit consultancy Bridgespan Group. Writing in a
December article
in the Harvard Business Review, Jeffrey Bradach, Thomas Tierney
and Nan Stone note that there is a difference between good and bad
overhead. Without funding for good overhead, they write, nonprofits are
resigned to having at best B-level leaders. And B-level leaders won't
produce A-level results. Donors must remember that excellence in this
sector, without market pressures, is self-imposed. Due to unfailingly
positive feedback, donors too easily perpetuate mediocrity. Instead,
donors must establish the results for which they will hold themselves
accountable and then align grantmaking appropriately.
Related Reading
Report Looks at Budding Efforts Incorporating Cost into Measures of
Social Value
Approaches applying business
principles and investment analyses to grantmaking – or incorporating costs
in measuring social value and estimating social return on investment –
have not yet reached maturity, writes independent consultant Melinda Tuan
for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's Impact Planning and
Improvement program. In Measuring
and/or Estimating Social Value Creation: Insights into Eight Integrated
Cost Approaches, Tuan reviews eight approaches to incorporating
cost into measurements of social value in the social sector, analyzing
relative strengths and weaknesses of the approaches and identifying
cross-cutting issues. Among efforts profiled in these areas are those from
REDF, formerly the Roberts Enterprise Development Fund (which Tuan
co-founded and previously managed), the Robin Hood Foundation, the William
and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Center for High Impact Philanthropy.
Tuan notes that there is a discrepancy in how and for what organizations
are using such analysis, as well as inconsistent use of language and a
lack of common measures in the sector.
Report Sees Tremendous Untapped Potential for Nonprofits in ‘Social
Franchising'
The potential for valuable partnerships between the
franchise industry, which offers "business in a box," and the nonprofit
community with its increasing practice of social enterprise, is
tremendous, according to a report. But that potential remains largely
untapped – there are fewer than 100 nonprofits operating social franchises
in the U.S. according to Streams
of Hope: Social Franchising: A New Path to Wealth for Nonprofits,
published by Community Wealth Ventures, a for-profit venture of the
nonprofit Share Our Strength. The publication is an introduction and guide
to the concept of "social franchising," which it calls a groundbreaking
concept offering nonprofits the opportunity to create reliable,
unrestricted wealth to support mission activities. As traditional funding
sources become shallow or dry up altogether, social franchising offers a
chance for sustainability, self-reliance and growth, according to the
report.
