Increasing Effectiveness in Global NGO Networks

A tsunami hits a densely populated coast. Aid organizations mobilize, and the world watches as several national members of the same global network respond independently in an uncoordinated way. A new treaty is being developed that would allow countries to claim carbon offsets through forest conservation. But national leaders in the same global nonprofit network disagree about its value. A large organization solicits funds from a major U.S. foundation. At the same time, its sister nonprofit, with the same brand name, approaches the foundation. The funder's leaders are confused, and wonder about the seeming conflict. The question of how much to centralize -- or decentralize -- decision-making and operations has dogged global organizations for centuries. Studies of for-profits show that the best answer can be different at different points in an organization's growth. But few such studies exist for nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and for too many of these nonprofits, the scenarios described above will sound all too familiar because they reflect flashpoints that occur when an operational structure is no longer optimal. What's needed is a way for an NGO's leaders to get out ahead of these flashpoints when possible, by learning to determine in advance when their organization's approach to operations and decision-making need to be revised, and along what lines. In an effort to help with this important task, we synthesized what we've learned through case work with a diverse group of global nonprofits; we also conducted interviews with the leaders and staff at more than 30 global NGOs. Our findings illuminate an emerging approach that blends the best of efficiencies at an organization's center and local innovation in the field

What It Really Takes to Influence Funder Practice

Influence is key to our work at the Ford Foundation and to philanthropy as a whole.Many of us in this space combine forces to shift how government, business, and nonprofits tackle urgent problems such as climate change, poverty, or threats to democracy. We also want to influence how the sector as a whole leverages philanthropy—whether this means a shift to giving larger grants, creating more flexible grants, or designing grants through a lens of diversity—in pursuit of a more equitable world.As important as this work is, we don't have a solid understanding of why certain efforts are effective in creating the influence they intend and what causes others to fail.To improve our understanding, we commissioned Milway Consulting to look at 12 independent initiatives aimed to influence how grantmakers and others engage in philanthropy and identify what advanced and prevented the adoption of good practice

Making Sense of Nonprofit Collaborations

To better understand the use and success of collaborations, The Bridgespan Group, in collaboration with The Lodestar Foundation, surveyed 237 nonprofit CEOs and 101 foundation officers in 2014 on their participation in four common forms of formal collaboration: associations (including coalitions and community collaboratives), joint programs, shared support functions, and mergers (including subsidiary relationships). The survey uncovered details about their participation, as well as the barriers that block results. This report explores the findings in detail, sharing positive trends in collaboration as well as the barriers that keep nonprofits and funders from working more effectively to realize the promise of collaborations

The Good Garden: How One Family Went from Hunger to Having Enough

https://stars.library.ucf.edu/diversefamilies/1931/thumbnail.jp

Eight Myths of Philanthropy

In this practitioner-engaged article, the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy describe eight common myths of philanthropy. Myth busting these misconceptions, the article provides an overview of who gives, how, and with what impact. In so doing, the article contributes to a better understanding of the breadth and diversity of giving