How can microcredit lift families from poverty?

Robert Moreau

Research Analyst/Outreach

GENESIS's Mi Cometa project hopes to bring assistance to 157 families

Presently, GENESIS will be supporting a microcredit initiative to bring relief and opportunity to 157 families in South Guasmo, Guayaquil, Ecuador. The Mi Cometa project hopes to create small business and economic growth in an area where families averaging five members live on monthly incomes of only U.S. $250, using an approach that has achieved global prominence as a way to reduce poverty.

A short introduction to microcredit

As noted by Empower Global, microcredit “involves providing small sums of capital, often as little as $75, to micro entrepreneurs to enable them to establish or expand their business and become self-reliant.” These small businesses, the summary goes on to note, employ “two people (usually a husband & wife, and benefits an entire family which on average consists of five people (a husband, wife & three children).”

On microcredit’s potential, Empower Global summarizes: “each micro-loan funds 1,000 businesses, creating or supporting 2,000 jobs and helping to transform the lives of 5,000 impoverished people.” These loans have an “impressive track record” of 95-98 percent repayment rates.

Though “microcredit” may seem to be a fairly new concept, its history dates back to 1976 when Dr. Muhammad Yunus of the University of Chittagong, Bangladesh founded the Grameen Bank as a pilot project in the village of Jobra. By 1983, it was formally incorporated as an independent bank.

Microcredit’s greatest successes came in 2005, when the UN celebrated in International Year of Microcredit, and 2006, when Dr. Yunus won the Nobel Peace Prize for his pioneering work with Grameen.

Microcredit program example (diagram), Vietnamese Heritage Institute

Examples of microcredit organizations/projects

Grameen Bank (Bangladesh): The organization that started microfinancing, Grameen currently has 2,564 branches in 81,351 villages, with a total staff of 23,133. Since its inception, it has paid out Tk 522.24 billion ($9.09 billion in loans), with 463.24 billion (US $8.05 billion) repaid. 95 percent of the bank’s total equity is owned by its borrowers.
Ruwentu Women’s Micro-credit program (Uganda): Started by the Umoja Operation Compassion Society of British Columbia, this project began in 2007 when the organization raised $1,000 to lend to ten women (about $60 each) in the village of Ruwentu to start various businesses. As of February 2009, the project scope expanded to 23 beneficiaries.
BancoSol (Bolivia): Originally founded in 1986 as the “Fundacion para Promocion el Desarollo de la Microempresa,” BancoSol became the first commercial bank specializing in microfinance in 1992. Today it is active in eight major cities in Bolivia, and has over 100 branches. As of 2008, it had 109,763 active borrowers. Its status as a commercial bank has led to some concern over mission drift.
World Job and Food Bank (various): A Canada-based organization with United Nations (ECOSOC) consultative status, the WJFB grew out of the Calgary Interfaith Food bank starting in 1982 and was formally registered as a charity in 1986. Their various initiatives have included two three-year (2001-2004) microcredit projects in Peru and Bolivia.

As should be noted, no single approach towards eradicating poverty is an instant cure-all, and microcredit itself has not been without controversy. However, microcredit has proven itself over its 34-year history to be an effective and novel tool to enable families to lift themselves into self-sufficiency.

Mi Cometa (GENESIS): Building on microcredit’s success

The Mi Cometa initiative looks to continue microcredit’s strong history of enabling opportunity for those in need. Focusing on an area where the average income is less than half of what is required for an adequate living in Ecuador, its goal is to work with families through education as well as loan-granting, with a 50-hour training program covering such diverse areas as microcredit, marketing, and leadership.

GENESIS is hoping to raise $17,500.00 for this initiative, and any donation is appreciated.

Reader Questions: What do you think of microcredit as a way to address global poverty? What benefits or drawbacks (mentioned or not in this post) do you see it as having? What do you think about GENESIS’s Mi Cometa project in terms of what it offers or could offer? Responses to these, as well as all other questions and comments, are strongly encouraged.

How education can make a difference in Ghana

By Robert Moreau

Research Assistant/Outreach

map of Ghana, UNGEI

Currently, GENESIS is undertaking an education support initiative in West Mamprusi, Northern District, Ghana. The Center for Youth and Women Empowerment’s goals are to make school supplies available for students to reduce drop-out rates, provide support for children and parents, and promote education for adolescent girls. Through these steps, GENESIS hopes to help create change in one of the country’s historically poorer areas.

Currently, Ghana is making great strides in its development, “[emerging] as a leading country in the Western and Central Africa region” as noted by IFAD’s Rural Poverty Portal. The most recent poverty figure in the country is 28.5 percent, almost half of its former figure in the beginning of the 1990s.

Education is a critical reason for this decline; since the government abolished school fees in 2005, enrollment has increased sharply, going from a 59.1 to 68.8 percent net primary enrollment from 2004-05 to 2005-06. However, a poverty gap persists in the rural north.

In rectifying this situation, education for women is crucial. Ama Achiaa Amankwah, in an August 2008 AllAfrica.com piece, notes “the impact of women in Ghana cannot be underestimated” as they “form over 52% of the country’s population.” Women are guaranteed legal equality, but social and economic pressures tied to a traditional social role as homemakers, as well as a lack of potable water and sanitation facilities have impaired education for girls. As of 2004, the adult literacy rate for females was 75% of the male rate, while for youth it was 86%. Gender parity rates for primary schools have improved since the abolition of school fees, though there is still work to be done.

Ghana has done much to improve educational access and emphasize girls’ schooling, though there is still work to be done. Through projects such as GENESIS’ Center initiative, NGOs and philanthropists can help make a positive impact.

Robert Moreau is Research Analyst/Outreach for the GENESIS Network. A 2008 Master’s graduate of the University of Massachusetts Lowell in Regional Economic and Social Development, Moreau has been working for GENESIS since July 2009. His work has included freelance newspaper pieces and a newsletter published for a Lowell-area social services agency in 2008

21st Century Aid: How can social media build humanitarian movements?

By Robert Moreau

Research Analyst/Outreach

social media landscape

Early on into the second decade of the 21^st century, new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are unlocking a revolution in how people understand and interact with the world. A 2008 online poll by We Media/Zogby found that almost half of respondents used the internet as their primary news source, with a majority in the 18-29 demographic. The rise of the internet and Web 2.0 has brought with it immense opportunities for increasing awareness of local and global issues, but also concerns about traditional journalism’s future as it tries to adapt.

More notable about social media’s rise is how it is going beyond simply reporting news to complementing and even creating movements, as activists are using its power to unite people. And as the examples of UNCHR’s innovations and the ongoing Haiti relief effort reveal, it is transforming how humanitarian aid campaigns are conducted and moving potential volunteers into direct action.

UNHCR

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is the UN agency coordinating refugee aid. Today, it is active helping 34 million refugees in 110 countries, with a staff of around 6,600.

Afghan refugees, deported from Iran

UNHCR is emerging as a leader in new media and networking; according to Claudia Gonzales, former head of Public Relations and Special Projects for the agency, “in the two years I was working there, I saw the transformation of an entire organization and the way they communicated about the refugee crisis…from being an organization that was conservative to be the leading organization that is using social media in the United Nations.” UNHCR’s presence today includes over 1 million followers on Twitter, putting it in the top 200 for subscriptions. It also has Facebook and Myspace pages, a Youtube channel, and Flickr gallery, enabling it to communicate information.

Two of UNHCR’s recent notable campaigns are:

Its 2008 World Refugee Day campaign, which featured a YouTube video calling for viewer responses, producing $1 dollar per posted response. A “Give Refugees a Hand” Facebook application released one day before World Refugee Day added users three times faster than a typical app. Google, MSN, and others promoted the campaign on their home pages.
The Gimme Shelter campaign, launched in December 2008 and featuring a series of short films by Ben Affleck set to the tune of the Rolling Stones’ “Gimme Shelter” and filmed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. An example can be seen here. A Facebook Gimme Shelter Cause page was also created.

The real success of UNHCR’s social media effort, Gonzales notes, is the fact that communication is a “two-way street” where “the UNHCR team engages in a conversation…where they want to know what people are saying,” even using online communities to test outreach ideas. She also says that learning how to engage potential supporters with a message of hope is important. “The tone matters…how do you actually make sure you are bringing up the refugee issues into people’s minds in a way that is human?” Through means such as enabling refugees to share their stories directly, UNHCR has met with success.

The Haiti relief effort: New media’s maturation moment?

The impact of the January 12 earthquake in Haiti is still being felt today, as the country tries to regain its footing. On

Haiti aid volunteers

February 22, Haitian President Rene Preval stated the death toll “might reach 300,000 people” with various issued estimates ranging from 170,000 to 270,000. The Al-Jazeera article Preval was quoted in also noted 1.5 million people still live in tent cities in Port-au-Prince, and over $2 billion total combined from private donors and the United Nations being pledged for the country’s reconstruction.

Immediately after the disaster and in the absence of official sources, social media played a critical role in giving the world a view of what was going on in the country, and who needed help. Rich McKinney, in a January 17 posting on Social Media Storm, noted that “Untold news stories have been published of people who are still alive and trapped under rubble and able to text, tweet or post to Facebook their location, and their desperate need for help,” then noting a NY Daily News story describing how a medical plane was able to be landed through Twitter.

Traditional media outlets also relied on online content, with the BBC tweeting from the ground and CNN using citizen-created iReports, as well as citing blog postings and twitter feeds as material for news stories. As Dallas News noted in a January 30 article “many believe the Haiti relief efforts have elevated social media from bit player to starring role” as a global communication medium during a major event.

ICT use also enabled alarmed watchers of the tragedy to make an impact as donors and even volunteers. Two major examples are:

The Red Cross’s Haiti text message campaign, which raised $7 million in its first two days, has been at the forefront of a historic mobile giving drive. By January 21, over $30 million had been donated to Haiti relief efforts, leading Verizon’s Jeffrey Nelson to call it “the largest outpouring of charitable support by texting in history-by far.”
The formation of Crisis Camps, where computer experts have volunteered to create maps of areas struck by the quake, as well improved family locator and information services. The first Crisis camp was launched at USC, and the concept has spread as far as Canada, Colombia and London.

Though social media has its limits as to what it can do, there is no doubt that it has made a tremendous impact in enabling the humanitarian aid campaign for Haiti.

The GENESIS Network: harnessing new media’s potential

Genesis education initiative, Ghana

Since its founding in 2008, the GENESIS Network has actively sought to create a new standard for using social media to make a positive difference in the world. With four current initiatives-in Thailand, Ghana, Ecuador, and Haiti-GENESIS “uses social networking to develop international human rights projects…[including] building schools, economic development and orphan protection.” By using a mixture of quantitative and qualitative project analysis, it also presents a measure of accountability that surpasses other sources.

With the launch of its new website, GENESIS is working to take its model to the next level, guided by these five principles:

“Networking: People are our greatest resource. GENESIS brings individuals, organizations and companies together to develop and collaborate on a wide range of projects. As we expand our network of people, we likewise expand the network of resources from which any one person or project may draw.

Resource Sharing: GENESIS brings people together to meet, connect and share resources all in one spot.

Local Empowerment: We enable people to better use the resources they have or are given. They in turn teach others and the cycle continues.

Sustainability: We seek long-term solutions to problems by addressing the root causes and eliminating them through people and resources.

Transparency: We’re always happy to see the results of our hard work. Project transparency and responsibility are our top priorities.”

Moving into the future, GENESIS is working to build on its successes, expanding and improving its scope of projects and its ability to use social media to ensure that potential donors and volunteers are connected with those who need their help the most.

Reader questions: Moving forward, what are your impressions of GENESIS thus far? How has using the network enabled you to build connections and gain confidence in where your donations are going? Where do you think it could improve? What would you like to see in the future? And what do you think of the new website? All questions and comments are more than appreciated, and go a long way in finding out how GENESIS is benefitting, and can further benefit, you.

EVENT TOMORROW: GENESIS director talks US foreign aid innovations

Robert Moreau

Research Assistant

On January 27 at Park Plaza in Boston, GENESIS director Adam Swartzbaugh is giving a timely p resentatio n on “how US dollars are being spent on foreign aid programs.”

The United States leads the world in giving abroad, with $122.8 billion total foreign aid donations in 2005. With the current relief efforts in Haiti, the topic of how funds are used to aid people “on the ground” is a focus of interest. Swartzbaugh’s talk will focus on how programs “are being shaped to accommodate a widening array of developmental environments” and how people can become actively involved in these efforts.

Joining Swartzbaugh is Todd McCormack, co-founder of Partners in Health. Started in 1987, PIH organizes “comprehensive and community-based” projects to combat disease and poverty in the developing world. Its work has expanded to seven countries, as well as supporting projects in Guatemala and Mexico. McCormack will be focusing on disaster relief programs providing aid in Haiti.

The presentation is sponsored by the Boston Rotary Club, and will be held at 6pm at Park Plaza in Boston. For more information, email Adam at info@gnetwork.org , or contact the Boston Rotary club at (617) 426-7133 and info@BostonRotary.org.

We hope you can join us tomorrow for this event.

How can you avoid Haiti fundraising scams?

Robert Moreau

Research Analyst

In the aftermath of the recent devastating earthquake in Haiti, people all over America have mobilized to help its victims. Total donations, as of January 21, have exceeded $305 million. Methods of raising money have included newer methods such as online donations and an American Red Cross special text message program.

Disgracefully, scammers “were out in full force within a couple of hours” after the quake, as noted by internet watchdog ScamBusters. Just two days after the earthquake, Symantec Corp. tracked three spam emails, including one claiming to be from the British Red Cross Society, down to using the organization’s real address. BRCS press officer Mark South noted it was “an unfortunately well-put-together fraud.”

With relief money still desperately needed and many wanting to find out how they can best help, the question becomes how potential donors can make sure their money is going to the right place. The Christian Science Monitor, in a January 15 piece, gives these five tips to “avoid scams and make sure your donations can make a difference.”

“Stick to well-known, reputable charities.
Be cautious when donating online
Donate to organizations, not individuals
Check the charity out
Give money, not food, clothing, or equipment.”

In addition, ScamBusters has a four-step list of steps you can take:

“1. Always use common sense.
2. Never respond to an email request for a donation.
3. Check to make sure any charity is legitimate before contributing.
4. Do not open [email] attachments-they likely contain viruses or other malware.”

CNN has a list of reputable charities involved with Haitian relief, and it is a good resource to use. Lastly, rather than open up an email, even if it looks to be from a reputable group, go directly to that organization’s website.

Overall, the best way to avoid scams is to use caution. Send aid through organizations you are comfortable with, and do research on different charities that claim to be working there.

We at GENESIS urge everyone to get involved in donating to relief efforts for the people of Haiti, and to make sure your money is going where it’s promised.

Reassessing Assessment: How does GENESIS have an advantage over Charity Navigator and other monitoring sites?

Robert Moreau

Research Analyst/Outreach

With a desire to donate contrasted by an unsteady economy and an abundance of non-profits and projects, philanthropists want to make sure their money is put to good use. In response to these concerns, sites such as Charity Navigator and GuideStar have surged to prominence and media exposure.

While the increased scrutiny of what organizations do with charitable donations is a positive trend, these evaluators’ exclusive reliance on quantitative financial data says little about how people are helped on the ground, or other important components that make a project worth supporting. Because of this, a merged assessment model emphasizing qualitative as well as quantitative measurements is a better way to evaluate effectiveness.

The Charity Navigator controversy (or “is a Form 990 really THE definitive measure of success?”)

Charity Navigator, online since 2001, describes itself as “America’s premier independent charity evaluator,” which “works to advance a more efficient and responsive philanthropic marketplace by evaluating the financial health of over 5,400 of America’s largest charities.” Its overview/about us section notes accolades received from magazines such as Time, Forbes, and BusinessWeek, as well as its use on cable programs ranging from “The Factor with Bill O’Reilly” to “The Daily Show.”

Charity Navigator ranks charities that are given a tax-exempt 501 c (3) status, through their IRS Form 990’s. Four years of 990 forms are required by Charity Navigator for evaluation purposes.

From Form 990 information, Charity Navigator ranks charities from 4 stars (“exceptional”) to 0 (“exceptionally poor”), evaluating their Organizational Capacity (revenue growth, expenses growth, working capital ratio) and Organizational Efficiency (fundraising efficiency and expenses, program and administrative expenses) to come up with their final score. More information can be found here.

Rated charities can be found in nine broad categories, with their own subcategories: Animals, Environment, International, Arts, Culture, Humanities, Health, Public Benefit, Education, Human Services, and Religion. It also maintains several “Top Ten” charity lists.

The dilemma of rating organizations through financial scales, however, is that they do not necessarily tell the picture of the services they are providing. As the Wall Street Journal explained in its December 19, 2008 article “Charity Rankings Giveth Less Than Meets the Eye”:

“Like stocks, charities are typically rated by their financial numbers or by qualitative characteristics such as corporate governance-or both. Unlike stocks, charities have no single measure akin to a business profit to determine successful performance. There is a widespread search for such a number, but the challenges may be too daunting. Meanwhile, some of the measures that are used may inspire bad actors to try to game the system.”

An April 2007 posting on netsquared.org is far less charitable in the wording of its assessment:

“The cornerstone of the rating is the program expenses divided by total expenses…this may be useful in weeding out the charities that are literally trying to scam you, but it is a backwards way to figuring out who actually helps people as effectively as possible…the quality of your plan is so much more important than the size of your budget.”

The rest of Charity Navigator’s criteria are even more nonsensical. Charities are rewarded for having growing revenues (i.e., good fundraisers) and growing expenses (so apparently finishing a project or reducing costs is a bad thing)…maybe the “fundraising efficiency” metric would have some meaning if ability to raise funds were at all connected to ability to help people…but that’s just the problem. It isn’t, as long as donors have no sources of real information.

The Gates Foundation…wouldn’t rely on this stuff in a million years.”

Indeed, Charity Navigator’s own ranking system is its self-admitted shortfall. Charity CEO Ken Berger was quoted in a January 2009 article in Washington Business Journal as saying “I think what happens is that some people go to the site, they type in the name, they look at the stars, they leave” despite a website blurb explaining that users shouldn’t just take its ratings as the only guide.

Charity Navigator and similar evaluators, in summary, make an honest effort to educate prospective donors about the organizations they may send funds to. But relying on a blank financial statement or statements such as a Form 990 alone does not tell the whole story of how a project is making an impact.

So, after all this, the question can be asked: Is there a better way? Yes, there is…

The GENESIS approach: Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment

As an innovative social networker for development organizations, the GENESIS Network’s goal is to “[provide] a highly interactive environment wherein organization members, philanthropists, project community members and volunteers communicate and collaborate effectively,” taking advantage of social media technology to promote a more transparent and efficient system of accountability. More specifically, with GENESIS:

Users can create a customized profile enabling them to actively keep track of projects they support, with tools ranging from regular progress reports to quality assessment ratings from donors, project staff, and third-party monitors.
Beneficiary pages enable donors to build a connection with the people they are helping.
All projects are posted online, with all initial information ratings once approved. Regular updates on progress, including changes, successes, failures, etc. are a strong determining factor in assessing a high-quality rating to an initiative.
Project data includes a clear explanation of finances and where money is allocated, enabling philanthropists to make smart choices about where their donations are going.

Through combining a mix of quantitative and qualitative data, as well as leveraging social media through enabling constant communication between donors, project leaders, and others, the GENESIS Network is actively creating a new standard of assessment and accountability.

For readers: What would you like to see from GENESIS in terms of promoting project accountability? What do you like about what the Network has to offer and where do you think it could improve? Any and all questions and comments are welcome.

Building Bridges: How charities are linking American interests to education abroad.

Robert Moreau

Research and Outreach

Children helped by Kashmir Family Aid, a charity active in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir

As noted in our last piece, philanthropy abroad also impacts important national issues for Americans. GENESIS’ schools, as well as similar efforts from other organizations, form an important part of the puzzle for curbing human trafficking-a modern-day slave trade that extends into and across the country. Indeed, charity abroad with an emphasis on education can advance American interests in other ways as well.

One clear example is in the geopolitical hotspots of Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, where NGOs and philanthropists have worked to curb terrorism by building schools and sponsoring students. As Sam Carpenter of Kashmir Family Aid, an Oregon-based nonprofit working in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir, noted in a September 19, 2008 American Prospect interview.

“there’s three types of schools [in the region]. There’s public schools provided by the government and private schools…but there’s another kind of school over there…called a Madrassa, and these are religious schools.”

“The estimates are between fifteen-and twenty thousand of them in Pakistan alone, and then there’s a lot of them in Afghanistan. The long story short is that the kids spend 10 to 12 years-they go in there at an early age, and they learn the Koran, and that’s great, but they don’t learn anything else.”

Bereft of skills, he stated, graduates do not have much opportunities. Carpenter estimated “about 15 to 20 percent are what we call militant schools” that actively prepare students for a career as a jihadist for pay “in our money $200 to $300 a month” considered very lucrative in the area. Though most families want to see their children attend public or secular private schools, he explained, many times the only available choice is a Madrassa education.

Greg Mortenson, co-founder of Central Asia Institute

Kashmir Family Aid, which as of 2008 has sponsored seven schools and 1,500 students, is one organization that has made an impact in the area. Possibly the largest known group active in the region is the Central Asia Institute (CAI), co-founded in 1996 by Greg Mortenson and Jean Hoerni. CAI describes its mission as “to promote and support community based education, especially for girls, in remote regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan,” with the emphasis on girls as a strong potential agent of change in society who make up most of the world’s uneducated youth.

CAI is actively involved with schools in nineteen regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, concentrated in the central and northern areas of both countries. As of 2009, its total involvement was “131 schools…which provide education to over 58,000 children, including 44,000 girls.” Its work also includes the charity Pennies for Peace, actively involving students in American classrooms in fundraising.

Examples such as these as well as GENESIS’ own education projects show how working with underserved groups abroad ultimately creates a positive impact in addressing issues important to Americans. And it is because of these connections that GENESIS is increasing its scope with upcoming education and training projects in Africa (Ghana) and Latin America (Ecuador). GENESIS is also planning to expand its initiatives in the Middle East as well.

Through linking concerns in America to those abroad, charities such as GENESIS are building bridges in an interconnected world.

Slaves in our backyard. The illegal trafficking and trade of humans into the US and how GENESIS prevents it.

Recently, GENESIS completed a major fundraising drive for its second school in Mae Chaem, Northern Thailand. The new building, which will provide education for 200 children in one of that country’s poorest areas, is also an attempt to rescue potential victims of a modern-day slave trade.

Human trafficking, the smuggling of persons for sexual and other forced labor, is “a heinous crime and human rights abuse. The most vulnerable members of the global community, those who have limited access to social services and protections, are targeted…for exploitation.” It is “now the third most profitable criminal activity, following only drug and arms trafficking” with around $9.5 billion in annual profits, as noted by the U.S. Department of Justice.

The number of people trafficked worldwide annually is widely disputed, but the most commonly cited figure is the U.S. State Department estimate of 600,000-800,000. At least half of victims are children, and the most common destination for trafficked persons is into the sex trade.

Southeast Asia, where GENESIS’ work thus far has concentrated, is the most active region in the world for traffickers; as noted by the International Organization for Migration, “between 200,000 and 450,000” victims are estimated to be trafficked within and out of the region annually. Trafficking in the region is linked to high levels of border crossing fueled by “economic and social push factors…[including] poverty, disparities in economic development, lack of education and job opportunities” among its causes. Irregular or undocumented migration accounts for 30 to 40 percent of all movement of persons, compounding the problem.

But where does the United States figure into the equation? Currently, we are one of the top three destination countries for human trafficking victims, along with Australia and Japan. An estimated 14,500 to 17,500 persons are smuggled into the country annually. As the U.S. Department of Education notes, “cases of human trafficking have been reported in all 50 states, Washington D.C., and some U.S. territories.”

How, then, can building schools abroad make an impact? The causes of human trafficking and its growth are complex, but we note that providing opportunities for potential victims to lift themselves from poverty is a critical piece of the puzzle in fighting it. Indeed, the United Nations has emphasized education and development as ways to combat trafficking. For example, Article 9 (4) of the Trafficking in Persons Protocol calls on states parties to “take or strengthen measures…to alleviate the factors that make persons, especially women and children, vulnerable to trafficking, such as poverty, underdevelopment and lack of equal opportunity.”

GENESIS’ projects complement activities from such organizations as the Development and Education Programme for Daughters and Communities (DEPDC) in Thailand and GABRIELA in the Philippines in emphasizing education as a preventative tool.

By supporting organizations such as GENESIS that emphasize education and opportunity for children in poverty, philanthropists can make an impact on in fighting a modern slave trade and major human rights issue that impacts America as well as the world.

What role should youth serve in youth philanthropy initiatives?

Service_Learning The role of youth in charities vary from almost non-existent to limited roles where they can merely serve as a prop to communicate adults’ messages, to models where they have an equal role with adults or even run the organization entirely. The Jewish Teen Funders’ Network lists nine “degrees of participation” going down from maximum to minimum involvement.

9. Youth Initiated and Directed
8. Youth Initiated, Shared Decisions with Adults
7. Youth and Adult Initiated and Directed
6. Adult Initiated, Shared Decisions with Youth
5. Consulted and Informed
4. Assigned but Informed
3. Tokenism
2. Decoration
1. Manipulation

Though a strong adult-controlled model may be favored by those unsure about giving youth a decision-making stake, not acknowledging the skills and ideas of young participants can damage a program. As was noted in a 2001 University of Wisconsin-Madison study “the mutual contributions of youth and adults can result in a synergy, a new power and energy that propels decision-making groups to greater innovation and productivity…youth and adults become more committed to attending meetings and create a climate that is grounded in honest appraisal, reflection, and ongoing learning.” Through taking an active role as contributors and leaders, youth naturally feel more of a stake in the program and desire to involve themselves in it.

Many “best practice” guides recommend the creation of youth boards where teens take a direct role in program administration alongside adult members. The James Irvine Foundation notes that “creating youth boards linked to adult-driven institutions exposes youth to the process of making important decisions, while also demonstrating to adults how youth can be a part of critical community decisions.”

The W.K. Kellogg Foundation recommends diversity as critical in forming a successful youth board, with members of all “age, gender, race, religion, socio-economical, and geographical [groups]…leadership ability is distributed across the youth population; dropouts have just as much potential to lead as members of the National Honor Society.” The Kellogg Foundation, among its recommendations, suggests that “youth participants should range in age from 14 to 18 with attendance optional until the age of 21” and that youth members recruit replacements.

community_service_146235651_std For school-centered programs, though, initiation and implementation can be by default adult (teacher/faculty) led. Pennies for Peace is one example of this type of program. Established in 1994 as a program of the Central Asia Institute, Pennies encourages classrooms to fundraise for school-building and education in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Pennies expands by asking schools that want to start a campaign to register online, and provides them with a “toolkit” and other supplies such as videos and sample letters to parents and others. The campaign emphasizes that students should donate only pennies, as it believes this allows students of all economic backgrounds to be active contributors. One novel avenue Pennies for Peace emphasizes is direct implementation into class curriculum, such as teaching about Afghan and Pakistani history and culture.

The Genesis Network’s Change for Hope Youth Empowerment Program hopes to improve on the Pennies model through creating a platform where students can move into leadership roles. Concentrated on fundraising for school construction along the Burmese/Thai border, Change for Hope describes itself as “[giving] students an opportunity to apply themselves to real issues and develop real projects that make real differences…[and] the unique opportunity to build direct relationships with Burmese children.” Change for Hope’s goals include eventually establishing itself as a student-run group, as well as providing participants with opportunities including internships and volunteering abroad.

As concluding questions: If your organization runs a youth philanthropy program, what opportunities do you provide or wish to provide for young participants? More specifically, what are the different roles youth and adults have and how do they interact? What approaches work best for you and what additional points do you think charities can learn from? All answers, as well as other questions and comments are more than appreciated.

Can social media help nonprofits fundraise?

We live in an age where opportunities for communication are increasing faster than ever. With the rise of Web 2.0 media such as social networking sites and blogs, it has become all the easier for philanthropic organizations to build new connections, as well as publicize their activities and needs.

And charities have responded, emerging as the surprising leader in the social media landscape. A UMass Dartmouth study released in June stated

“new research shows that charitable organizations are still outpacing the business world and academia in their use of social media. In the latest study (2008) a remarkable eighty-nine percent of charitable organizations are using some form of social media including blogs, podcasts, message boards, social networking, video blogging, and wikis.”

These figures are an increase from 2007, in which “seventy-five percent of the respondents…reported they use at least one form of social media.” However, one area where charities can improve is in leveraging these tools to raise funds. In 2008, the study notes, only forty-five percent called social media “very important” to their fundraising strategy, versus forty-six in 2007. “Somewhat important” answers received a small decrease as well, with thirty-six percent in 2008 versus thirty-eight in 2007.

These figures are an interesting anomaly in what is overall a strong push among charities to adapt to and take advantage of social media. As these new forms of communication take hold and break boundaries, it is important to explore what they can bring to fundraising.

Case Study: Facebook Causes

“Causes” is one of Facebook’s most popular applications, boasting almost 34 million active users and over 174,000 fans. Active since 2007, Facebook Causes is “founded on the belief that in a healthy society, anyone can participate in change by informing and inspiring others…We strive to build tools for people to mobilize their friends for collective action…eventually [launching] movements that span local communities or even the globe.”

The application enables users to create an advocacy group, or “Cause” on Facebook, on which members can “discuss the issues, share their experience, post media, and sign petitions” as well as solicit donations to be delivered monthly to an agency of the cause’s choice, processed by partner Network for Good. It emphasizes equal access and touts itself as a way for smaller charities as well as larger ones to build an audience. It links to a page with “success stories” of organizations that have maximized Causes’ potential to grow a support base and often raise thousands of dollars in funds.

Causes is not without its detractors or controversy, however. An April 22 Washington Post article (“To Nonprofits Seeking Cash, Facebook App Isn’t So Green”) states

“Causes…has been largely ineffective in its first two years, trailing direct mail, fundraising events and other more traditional methods of soliciting contributions. Only a tiny fraction of the 179,000 nonprofits that have turned to Causes as an inexpensive and green way to seek donations have brought in even $1,000, according to data available on the Causes developers’ site…fewer than 1 percent of those who have joined a cause have actually donated money through that application.”

Among its findings, the article noted that $25 is a median donation on Causes, vs. $50 through traditional methods, and that just 185,000 members have ever contributed via the application.

The Washington Post article has been criticized by nonprofit-related blogs, as advocates emphasize that building relationships with prospective donors takes time and effort by an organization, and that the raised awareness makes the effort worthwhile. Nonprofit developer Betsy Harman of Harman Interactive is quoted as stating:

“Any nonprofit who thinks they can simply put a donate now button on their website or simply create a “Causes” page on Facebook and wait for the money to roll in, doesn’t understand online fundraising. It’s still about building relationships, telling your story, and taking potential donors through the process of cultivation, stewardship and solicitation…Causes…is just a tool for peer to peer fundraising but in order to raise money that tool has to be used by someone who is passionate about the organization and proactive about telling the organization’s story.”

Joe Green, Causes co-founder, was quoted in the Post article as saying that “Causes raises almost $40,000 a day across its groups, up from $3,000 a day a year ago” and that “the biggest successes have been tiny nonprofits who don’t have the name recognition of the big guys.”

Lastly, the Post noted that online fundraising is still in its infancy, and that less than three percent of total nonprofit fundraising is done online.

Last thoughts

The case study of Facebook Causes reveals some interesting points about fundraising through the use of social media. The takeaway for this is that, though it has much potential, it a very new field and not the instant, automatic money maker charities often hope for. But nonprofits should not discount the immense opportunites it can bring now and in the future.

The best route for charities is broaden goals long-term, talking advantage of new media in increasing awareness and building advocacy. Through convincing the global audience social networking sites can provide of the necessity of their work, organizations can help grow a support base for the future.

As final questions: How has your organization used or considered using social media to expand its audience? What have the results been? Is there any advice you would give to charities considering online fundraising?