|
|
|
 |
Winter 2007
Being Part of Something Bigger
by Mark Lindberg
American foundations have been engaged in advocacy and the public policymaking process since their earliest inception. They have used the influence of their boards, pursued campaigns of public information and education, created demonstration projects, used financial resources to leverage public funds, and pursued direct legislative lobbying, judicial strategies and executive branch persuasion. In short, they have worked at virtually every level of government.
Similarly, foundation grants in support of advocacy come in virtually all shapes and sizes. Some organizations wear advocacy on their sleeve, literally incorporating the word into the name of the organization. For those organizations, such as Advocating Change Together, advocacy is infused in every aspect of their work. Other organizations, best known for their human services, commit some part of their work to community change. The Jobs and Affordable Housing Coalition of the historic Family and Children's Service is an example of such a program. Other organizations are associated with issue-specific work, as well as community-based organizing.
What do these nonprofits have in common? The desire to change the status quo; the desire to make things more fair, more equitable and more just. Beyond the tremendous work that caseworkers, for example, do on behalf of individuals, advocacy is most profoundly thought of as an organizational commitment to changing a system or impacting an issue in a way that will enhance dignity or reduce disparities for more than a few individuals, and for more than a short period of time.
Answering Grantmaker Questions
For some foundations, considering their work in such a frame is unnerving. Questions arise. Does advocacy complement service work, and if so, how? How do indicators of success differ for advocacy compared to direct service? Is the foundation willing to take a longer-term view of success? Is there sufficient alignment between the values of the applicant or the issue and the foundation? What if the work becomes controversial and generates publicity? Is it legal to support this kind of work? Even if it includes lobbying? Those are all excellent questions, and space does not permit a full discussion of each. However, three threshold issues — legalities, evaluation and mission — warrant attention.
Addressing legal concerns is actually straightforward in nearly all cases. Simply put, most grants for advocacy will not give rise to legal questions. Much of what stands for "advocacy" is a form of community education or community-based organizing.
Unfortunately, many funders confuse those and other forms of advocacy with lobbying, even though lobbying constitutes only one form of advocacy. But even there, restrictions on funders and nonprofits are quite discrete. Numerous authoritative pieces can assist funders in sorting through most questions. As a result, foundations are left with a wide variety of activities to fund or carry out.
Given the generally limited technical rules related to advocacy, the issue of impact becomes a greater interest for many funders. At Otto Bremer Foundation, nonprofits have helped us understand the need to consider advocacy work differently from that of service delivery models. We've learned that efforts to change even a small system, amend a rule or create a new paradigm usually requires a longer-term view.
Measuring Advocacy Results
Measuring the results of such efforts also can be problematic, as the goals usually relate to how power and resources are shared or even redistributed. As a result, milestones for "success" may relate to process, at least in the short term, more than to the ultimate ends. By contrast, it may take years of education, and the right alignment of people and external factors, to achieve the ultimate change. Finally, given the adaptive challenges facing society and the nonprofit sector these days, it is not difficult to see how advocacy can be part of a foundation's funding strategy.
Perhaps the greatest set of issues that foundations and nonprofits face at this time is the reduction of public support for social programs, affordable housing and job training. There is increasing pressure for nonprofits and philanthropy to meet these demands. Without some consideration for the alternatives, foundations will subtly, incrementally and unwittingly fall into a funding pattern that is not sustainable.
Moreover, this pattern may not be wise. Is it appropriate for private donors, who tend to be unrepresentative of the broader community, to decide whether and how social programs grow? Foundation leaders in Minnesota have differing opinions about that question. Once priority is given to the question, then advocacy, either directly or indirectly, becomes an indispensable tool for progress and change.
It is tempting to view advocacy as an all-or-nothing strategy for foundations. That is a false choice. A thoughtful examination of the context in which a foundation operates, as well as deep understanding of its values, can reveal the efficacy of advocacy as an important grantmaking strategy.
|
Mark Lindberg, on leave from the Otto Bremer Foundation, is a Bush
Leadership Fellow studying at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. |
More
Information from the
Winter 2007 Edition of Giving Forum
|
Thank you to the sponsor of this issue of Giving Forum:
|
| $1,000 Supporter |
The Minneapolis Foundation
|
|
© Copyright 2007 Minnesota Council on
Foundations
Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher
is prohibited.
|
|
