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.

Week 3

            This weeks readings really made me think about the effectiveness of the money being donated. Not only the effectiveness of the donation, but about why people give money. I think that when I have given money in the past it was because I found the cause of the organization to be worthwhile or felt some sort of connection to the cause, but after reading Tim Harford’s article about studies done on giving by the University of Berkley, I realize that a large number of donators know very little about the organization they are giving to, and even less would give if they didn’t feel socially pressured.

            The PhilanTopic article, while talking about things that are a bit confusing (taxes), made me think about taxes as more than just annoying J. I had never connected donating and taxes on estates. It makes sense that if the estates of the deceased are highly taxed, the recipients of those estates will give less, because they are losing more, so I think that the tax being decreased a little, couldn’t hurt, as it will probably, hopefully, increase giving, BUT, ten percent decrease on estates worth such large amounts of money, is a significant lose to the government. I think that in a recession, decreasing the tax by so much, is a risky move, whether it increases giving to non profits or not.

            The Non Profit Nation chapter about Religion focused my attention on the amount of charitable work churches and religious congregation do. I found it interesting how much work churches and religious congregations do for the government. They fill a gap that, after tax increases or cuts, and most often regardless of recessions, in my opinion wouldn’t be filled. People that donate to churches have their reasons, like those studied in Harfords article, and it is usually faith based, but I think that the statistics show they give no matter what, and whether we agree with their intentions of giving or not, the donations they make to their churches fills a need for public service that our government cannot fill. Churches also seem to have less red tape, which in class became a fairly heated discussion, but if it allows them to make necessary contributions or set up relief after disasters faster than the government (which was the case after Hurricane Katrina), maybe less red tape is better.

            The last article Our Ineffectiveness at Measuring Effectiveness was sort of interesting, but I was somewhat confused by the points the author posed. I understand that he/she wanted a database of charitable organizations and how well they serve, or maybe spend their money, but other than that, I didn’t really find anything else interesting. In the library class today, we looked at a few websites that listed charitable organizations and how much they spent, assets, any bad feedback, and their tax information, so I don’t  really understand why the writer is so intent on having such a costly project if it seems what he is trying to achieve is already somewhat readily available.

            So that’s it for this week! Until next..

Week 2

            “The “good old times”, were not the good old times. Neither the master nor the servant was as well situated then as they are now”. I think that in examining wealth this is all that many Americans think about. The ideas of morals and connection to wealth are not thought of as much. Many people today do as they please when it comes to money, whether legal or not, and most often it seems that we all feel a strong connection to our money, only giving it up when it somehow benefits us. I think that is a difference between now and the “good old times” that Andrew Carnegie didn’t really discuss too much.. It may have just been that he technically grew up in what we would call the good old times now and that he didn’t witness the ideals of money that many people hold today, but it still seems interesting to me. I do understand his idea that what was available to only few, is now available to almost everyone, and I agree that that is a good thing, but I like that Carnegie also pointed out the negative, class side of the mass accumulation of wealth by such a small percentage of the population.

            Shifting to the for profit, non profit comparison, I found the idea of tangible and intangible outcomes interesting. I think that often this is the reason that many don’t see nonprofits as “real” businesses, because what they produce can’t be measured. I also found interesting the separation of influences. I think that after reading this, many would be turned off by large companies, that are out to serve a higher power agenda.

            Something else that surprised me is the idea of nonprofits actually having a bottom line. This is something most often associated with for profits. The connection between the mission of a nonprofit and their financial means to obtain that mission was very interesting.  

           

Reading/Lecture Week 1

The Non Profit Nation readings for week one were a really great insight into non profits and their effects on our society. I think it is interesting that when someone says nonprofit most people instantly think of this little run down volunteer agency, a place that has no permanent employees, no funds, and a place that one could not make a living from, when in fact, as the reading pointed out, many non profits are large organizations, that employ something like 8% of all Americans. When it comes to who can be considered a nonprofit and how the tax situation works though I don’t have a perfect understanding, but I think that as time goes on, and one works in a field, they gain a better understanding of exactly what that field is all about.. Or so I hopeJ.

In the first chapter of Non Profit Nation I found the definition of sectors to really provide a clear line as to where, and why, we separate certain aspects of the economy and society. When we look at the behaviors of nonprofit sectors, it’s really easy to understand why they aren’t lumped in with for profit corporations. I think this difference in behavior is why many of the people who have chosen to work in the nonprofit sector have done so. Not only are nonprofits looking out for the well being of certain groups and minorities, they are also making our society better for a large number of people.

Having said that nonprofits are looking out for the well being of many, I also found interesting the connection that chapter 2 of Non Profit Nation made with the power structure. I googled the ideas from this chapter and found it interesting how many corporations had sister nonprofits, whom looked after the agenda of that larger corporation. All the while, they get a positive image for being “giving”, which many associate with nonprofits. This is something that I am glad to have learned for future job searches..

All in all the readings and the class lecture on the history of philanthropy were interesting and I think that we had a great start to week one..

Introduction!

hey hey hey.. My name is Mackenzie and I am currently a junior studying PPPM and Political Science. I was previously involved with NEDCO, the Neighborhood Economic Development Corporation, where my interest in non profit business was really sparked. When I grow up I hope to work with HUD in low income housing, or a program like the Boys and Girls Club. I think that this class will really help me to narrow down my career aspects and hopefully I will come out with a better understanding of the way non profits run. I would say the main reason I am interested in non profits is because of the good they contribute to society and the all out focus on contribution and not at all on the bottom line.

The purpose of this blog is to interact with my PPPM 280 discussion group. I will be responding to readings and posts by my group members as well as possibly commenting on class. Let the fun begin.. .. :)