Week Four

            I found this week’s readings to be especially interesting. I hope to have a career in the social service area of non profits so it was nice to get some more information from the Non Profit Nation and other readings.

            The Non Profit Nation chapter really puts in perspective the depth of the social services that non profits provide. I thought the comment the author made about many citizens being blind to social services interesting. I have had a large number of interactions with non profit social service providers throughout my life, so that many don’t realize all that they do is unusual to me. I guess I understand that most people want to act like everything is peachy and not pay attention, but I wish it wasn’t that way, then maybe more people would seek help, and the stigma around certain social services would change.

            The next reading by Richard Thompson on the extra funds going to Louisiana’s low income energy assistance program was interesting, but nothing I haven’t read before. What interested me more were the comments at the end of the article. It seems crazy to me that so many people see this type of social service as unnecessary. I wonder how many of the people that read this article actually looked at the income those being assisted had to be under. The income a family of three must be under is not even $28,000. I can’t imagine having two parents working together and only making that much to pay for a three bedroom home, car, utilities, and all other monthly bills. Another thing that made me pretty made was a comment made by someone saying that those receiving assistance are wasting energy when they could be more conservative. Most housing for those with low incomes aren’t the most energy efficient. I would just like to see anyone that posted something negative on that article live the life of a low income family and tell me that they don’t need and very much so appreciate the help that they received. Some peoples kids… jeez…

            The Register Guard article on St. Vincent De Paul’s really surprised me. I don’t think I ever realized that they really do that much. I also found McDonald interesting… He’s not afraid to try something that he thinks could be successful, he is also interested in providing good things for those with lower incomes, such as energy efficient homes. Those in the private sector are always going to say they can’t compete, which might be true, but having someone like SVDP there to offer cheap alternatives; those in the private sector have to work to keep their prices in check, which I see as being held more accountable, not raising prices continually to make more and more money.

            The next article by Kent reiterated some things that I have already learned, but I liked the information it provided on policy options. I think that low income housing is extremely important, especially in the ever growing urban areas of cities, so all the ways to achieve this are interesting to me.

            While reading the article on Auburns shelter issues, I found myself wondering when it was going to end. I understand that the shelter has no money, but it’s interesting to me that the government wouldn’t step in. I also found it weird that the author had no real response other than the facts, no solution ideas, nothing. Some social service programs must remain open at all costs, and I think this is one of them, but I think that at some point this has to change, because while those living in the shelter are better off than they would be on the street, they don’t seem much better.

            The interview with the MAAC Project CEO was interesting.. He sure knows how to make everything sound pretty, sort of reminded me of a politician, but maybe that’s just me! I especially wondered when he spoke of the funding. He said that the “bureaucratic demands imposed by our funding sources” are getting in the way, but without them, there wouldn’t be a way to get in front of. Also when studying grant applications at my previous internship, I realized that the government imposes strict rules on the funding so that non profits can’t run wild with the funds and use it in ways that those in government don’t see fit. If the CEO of this social service organization is receiving grants, and he doesn’t like the terms, go look for new funding, he seems to have the communities’ support, so look for private funding. But what the article came down to for me was that the organization had money issues come up, and no matter how sweet you talk, management issues are still important to society, even if that society loves you as much as you claim.