No result found
This report describes counter-terrorism measures in effect in the United States after March 15, 2004. These measures are in response to an Executive Order that prohibits transactions with individuals and organisations deemed by the Executive Branch to be associated with terrorism. This handbook could help foundations interested in avoiding the legal consequences of providing support to organisations which may currently or in the future be associated with terrorism.
U.S. foundations made grants totaling nearly $1.5 billion focused on Africa in 2012. This represented 25 percent of foundations' international giving, up from 14 percent in 2002. Produced by Foundation Center in cooperation with Africa Grantmakers' Affinity Group, this first-ever report examines changes in funding for Africa over the past decade and provides detailed analyses of the distribution of funding in the latest year. The report also explores differences in funding priorities based on whether recipients are headquartered in Africa or outside of the African continent.
We talked with funders working in the US, Europe, and internationally about when, why, and how it's useful to scan the landscape for new ideas and new directions. This updated edition of a 2004 GrantCraft guide reflects key changes in philanthropy, from the rise of social media to a growing tendency to scan continuously for changes and opportunities.
What to ask, and how to ask itUsing data visualization for your learningOnline tools for scanningWhat's in the Guide?
What is Scanning? To understand how your efforts fit within a wider field of activity, it's often useful to look at the field as a whole to see where the opportunities, needs, and gaps are. That's what we mean by "scanning." A scan can help you adjust to a new position, learn a new field, take a fresh look at grants you've already made, keep current with larger trends, or chart a course for the future.Different Scans for Different Needs: Funders use scans for many reasons. Scans don't have to be long and complicated -- but a thorough scan can be well worth the time and effort. This section explores various reasons for scanning and describes a range of approaches to meet particular needs.What to ask, and how to ask it: Once you've framed the purpose of your scan, what kind of questions should you ask? And what's the best way to ask them? This section offers advice on eliciting the information you're looking for, pulling people together to share ideas, being a good listener, and leaving room for unexpected learning.Managing expectations: Once a funder starts asking questions, holding meetings, and seeking out advice on a given topic, people in the field are likely to notice and become curious. Here are some tips on how to give a clear impression of what you're doing and how to manage the understandable hopes of people who would like to receive support.Getting diverse viewpoints: A scan can be particularly useful when it concentrates on aspects of the field you don't know about, people you haven't heard from, and issues you hadn't considered before. This section offers some tested methods for soliciting unfamiliar ideas, meeting new people, and encouraging candid views and input.Scanning continuously: These days, many funders treat scanning as a more or less continuous activity -- a frame of mind or set of routines that helps them stay aware of the larger context, open to new ideas, and connected with broader networks.Sharing the results of your scan: There are many ways to put the information you uncover to use, both within your foundation and in the field. Here, our contributors share ideas about how to use a scan and its results for the widest possible benefit.
Funders Concerned About AIDS;
This report contains updated information on United States private, institutional grantmaking commitments in 2001 and 2002 focused on HIV/AIDS in the U.S. and internationally. It summarises the most up to date data on HIV-related grant commitments from all sectors of U.S. philanthropy, including private, family and community foundations, public charities, and corporate grantmaking programmes.
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation;
This report examines US federal funding to address the global HIV/AIDS epidemic in low- and middle-income countries. The data on US international aid for HIV/AIDS is broken down into bilateral and multilateral assistance programmes. Five federal departments and US-funded multilateral organisations are analysed regarding financial support for HIV/AIDS-related activities.
Funders Concerned About AIDS;
This report produced by the Funders Concerned About AIDS (FCAA) organisation covers 2003 HIV/AIDS grant commitments from 170 grantmaking organisations in all sectors of US philanthropy. The report presents and analyses data on total and top grantmaking, changes in giving pattern, geographic distribution and intended use of HIV/AIDS grants. The appendices list related resources for further reference.
Funders Concerned About AIDS;
This report analyses HIV/AIDS philanthropy undertaken by U.S.-based grantmakers in 2005 and 2006. This report includes also data about funders' disbursements (actual monies transferred) in addition to their funding commitments.
According to the authors of Come on in. The water's fine. An exploration of Web 2.0 technology and its emerging impact on foundation communications, foundations that have adopted new and still emerging forms of digital communications -- interactive Web sites, blogs, wikis, and social networking applications -- are finding that they offer "opportunities for focused convenings and conversations, lend themselves to interactions with and among grantees, and are an effective story-telling medium." The report's authors, David Brotherton and Cynthia Scheiderer, of Brotherton Strategies, who spent nearly a year exploring how foundations are using new media, add that "electronic communications create an opportunity to connect people who are interested in an issue with each other and the grantees working on the issue."
The report also acknowledges that the new technologies raise skepticism and concern among foundations. They include the "worry of losing control over the foundation's message, allowing more staff members to represent the foundation in a more public way, opening the flood gates of grant requests or the headache of a forum gone bad with unwanted or inappropriate posts."
Still, the report urges foundations to put aside their worries and make even more forceful use of new media applications and tools. The report argues that whatever is "lost in message control will be more than made up for by the opportunity to engage audiences in new ways, with greater programmatic impact."
Acknowledging that adoption of new media tools will require some cultural and operational shifts in foundations, the report offers suggestions from Ernest James Wilson III, dean and Walter Annenberg chair in communication at the University of Southern California, for how to deal with these challenges. He says that for foundations to make the best use of what the technology offers, they should concentrate on three things:
Build up the individual "human capital" of their staffs and provide them the competencies they need to operate in the new digital world.Make internal institutional reforms to reward creativity and innovation in using these new media internally and among grantees.Build social networks that span sectors and institutions, to engage in ongoing dialogue among private, public, nonprofits and research stakeholders.As Wilson also says, "All of these steps first require leadership, arguably a new type of leadership, not only at the top but also from the 'bottom' up, since many of the people with the requisite skills, attitudes, substantive knowledge and experience are younger, newer employees, and occupy the low-status end of the organizational pyramid, and hence need strong allies at the top."
Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations;
As events in the business sector have highlighted, companies can play by the rules and yet produce misleading financial statements. This study examines the nongovernmental organizations that provide a substantial portion of higher education in the United States. We seek to determine whether private colleges and universities take advantage of the discretion available to them under accounting and auditing standards by presenting an operating measure in their statement of activities. We find that nearly 60 percent of schools report an operating measure but the items included or excluded from operations vary widely.
This publication is Hauser Center Working Paper No. 17. The Hauser Center Working Paper Series was launched during the summer of 2000. The Series enables the Hauser Center to share with a broad audience important works-in-progress written by Hauser Center scholars and researchers.
Funders for LGBTQ Issues;
A first-ever research report on U.S. organizations led by and for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) people of color. The report describes 84 of these organizations by geographic location, geographic focus, geographic setting, populations, issues, strategies and fiscal characteristics.
Funders for LGBTQ Issues;
An annual research study examining grantmaking to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) organizations and projects by U.S. foundations in 2006. In addition to providing general figures on total giving and grants, the report examines LGBTQ foundation giving by foundation type, geographic focus, type of support, population, strategy and issue. A master listing of LGBTQ grantmakers in the U.S., for calendar year 2006, is included in the report.