Sunday, April 22, 2018

The Longevity of Philanthropy in the Modern Age


Hey guys, like most of you, I spend a obscene amount of time on the internet. How can our connectivity perhaps better our world?

What is the true purpose of philanthropic action? One may answer that philanthropy is a push for good, an opportunity to see change and alleviation of turmoil or struggle. Others see an opportunity to aid the evolution of a movement. Others may just see philanthropy as an opportunity to build good karma. However, the individual sees it from their own perspective, the main goal of all philanthropists is creating lasting change. The main goal of giving is to achieve longevity in the goal. Many of the issues we tackle as philanthropists are not momentary, they are institutionalized and broad. Issues we face are often not remedied immediately, but rather by continued efforts to change the way we function as a society.

Continuation and collaboration are the key to pursuing change in the modern world.

We are in the age where the big-name families like the Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Gates are not the only people able to give. We are pushing towards an era of crowdsourced change. Earlier this spring, The Smithsonian set out on a quest to tap into that market. One of the nation’s top science centers engaged in an extensive and wildly successful crowdsourcing venture to try and build capital to enact lasting change for the education and preservation work the Smithsonian accomplishes. The campaign involved more than half a million individual donors. 93% of donors made a donation of $100 or less, but those donations totaled to about $78 million dollars overall.

Regardless of the size of the sum of money or amount of time we are able to give, we as philanthropists want to make the biggest possible impact. In other words, we push to get the biggest bang for our buck. We must first realize that our relatively small, but impactful donation will not solve any real long-term problems, but in concert with others we as individuals in a Binghamton University classroom can contribute to lasting social change.

We have already seen some crowdsourcing ventures presented in class, like Kiva and other GoFundMe like websites, and these organizations are making huge contributions from the combined efforts of thousands of internet donors. My question to all of my peers is do you believe in the power we yield as small, millennial donors in the internet age to be philanthropic? Do you feel we as a population can use our clout to make change that for a long time was only attainable with contributions from the super-rich? And finally, if you do enjpy crowdsourced philanthropy like I do, what attracts you to it? What makes giving small amounts and in turn seeing large change so enticing?

Thank you all, looking forward to reading your responses.

Here is the Smithsonian article:
https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Smithsonian-s-19-Billion/243149?cid=cpstw

Tuesday, April 17, 2018

The Power of Expansion

Hey all! I have anticipated posting this since our last site visit to the Wilson's Children Center. So here it goes.. The opportunity to receive additional grant money to provide to local organizations is a big game changer in our course's mission. It would be an incredible opportunity the Learning by Giving Foundation could provide.
Over the course of the semester, we have spent so much time analyzing and debating methods and criteria of the evaluation of non-profit 501C3 organizations in Broome County. Personally, when I was thinking about where to allocate additional funding a few thoughts came in to my mind.
When we first created our presentations about are organizations, I had a concern that I would not be able to conceptualize the data we were being given (budget plans, 990's, etc.). However, after attending site visits, the process of this class finally made sense to me. The reason we read articles my Peter Singer, Prof. Campbell, and many other civil service scholars was to place foundational concepts into our minds to later be activated. Therefore, in order to consider how to allocate new funds, I would like to do the same.

When considering this new funding what reasoning do you use to support your claim?

I believe that in this case the concept of altruistic giving may not really apply and therefore, I would revert to the debate of whether this decision will be made with our heads, our hearts, or a combination of both. When I first chose my organizations, they came from my heart. I felt passionate about sharing what I had found with the class. Now, with an expanded understanding, I feel as if I could do more good by using my head to motivate this decision. I am curious if you, the reader, agree?

Instead of you all reading my post and analyzing what my opinion is, I would like to open up this post to be a conversation. 

There are many possibilities for our additional grant:
  • The grant can be an operating or program grant.
  • We can decide between the YWCA, WCC, Boys and Girls Club, MHAST, or CHOW.
  • Also, if allowed, we can provide the additional grant to another Broome County organization discussed in the class that didn't make the final vote (like the Kopernick Observatory for example). Although, I do not know if that is realistic with our time constraints. 
Personally, especially after hearing from the WCC, I believe that the extra grant should become operating. Like Prof. Campbell explained many times non-profits simply need cash to be able to cover administrative costs. I am aware that the concept of giving cash to an organization may not pull at our hearts, however I truly believe it is an efficient decision and that it will provide an opportunity that is hard to come by. The challenge is that I cannot decide on who I would give the money to. In regard to who will receive the donation, I am curious to hear everyone's thoughts. 

Looking forward,
Molly S.

Monday, April 16, 2018

The Red Devils- Supporting Breast Cancer Families in My Community


     My mother was diagnosed with stage 3 breast cancer in 2007 at the age of 34. I was 8 years old. I didn’t understand what those words meant in terms of my life or my family’s. She was strong and loved by everyone she knew. She was kind to strangers and made new friends wherever she went. Let’s just say you couldn’t have a conversation with her without unknowingly sharing your whole life story as well. She did go into remission in 2009, but the small glimmer of hope we had was snatched away in 2011 when the cancer came back and metastasized to her lymph nodes and brain. My mother passed away on February 1st, 2015; that was a little more than 3 years ago and yet I still feel every rip that her disease tore into the fabric of our lives. The worst thing about a disease like cancer is that it holistically attacks everyone who hears the word; everyone who knows someone who is diagnosed. As a young child it starts with questions like “Why did mommy have to lose all her hair? Why does grandma have to move in? Why can’t mommy come out to play in the yard?” and then it slowly becomes a way of life. It became my normal. For a spouse like my father, the questions were along the lines of “How are we going to be able to afford treatment? Why us? Why now? What’s going to have to change?” and then they change to an obsession with a cure and heartbreak when one cannot be found. At the time of my mom’s diagnosis my parents had just sold the family store, gotten new jobs, and had bought a house. They wanted me to grow up away from the high crime and violence of the D.C. area. Instead they were blindsided, and my mom took charge like she always did; working and easing everyone’s fear while still going to chemotherapy and radiation. She was the one who connected my family to the nonprofit I want to discuss with you all.

     The Red Devils is a 501(c)(3) organization that was founded to “fund services that improve the quality of life for breast cancer patients and their families” in the state of Maryland. At the time of my mom’s initial diagnosis they provided my family with funds for my mother’s co-payments, prescriptions, and treatments. Their help allowed her to get genetic testing. I could never repay such a gift; one that allows me to live a life knowing that I am not genetically at risk for breast cancer. The Red Devils provided us with funds for groceries, house cleaning, gas cards, parking at the hospital. They couldn’t cure my mom’s cancer, but they could help to aid cancer’s financial burden. For my mom, it meant she could step away from her job at the bank and take her long-term leave at home. It relieved so much of her stress and allowed for her to grow stronger and stronger which led to a 2-year remission period. In those 2 years my mom was my mom again, no longer a cancer patient; no longer “sick”. She came outside and played tennis with me, she taught me to cook, she told me she loved me without worrying it would be the last time. The Red Devils helped her be able to do that, just like it has helped 7,582 other Maryland breast cancer patients in the span of 15 years.

     Between 2002 and 2017, the organization has invested $3,557,094 towards helping patients.  $2,169,827 has gone towards family support, $782,561 to medical services, and $604,706 to transportation. Family support is defined as funds needed for meals, groceries, house cleaning, home care, rent, utilities, mortgage, child care, etc. Medical services are considered to be anything having to do with co-payments, prescriptions, treatments, procedures, prosthetics, genetic testing, etc. And transportation support includes cab fare, vouchers, gas cards, metro passes, parking, toll, and automotive repairs. With these funds, The Red Devils have been able to support 5,500 breast cancer families so that their loved ones could either start or remain in treatment. The organization puts a lot of emphasis on making themselves an easily accessible resource to patients. Like my mom, patients are referred to the organization by any medical staff or social worker from any one of their 46 partnered hospitals in the area. This way the organization can make themselves readily available to anyone who needs them without having to access a patient’s situation on a case by case basis. In this way they are utilizing the already available resources of the hospital staff and social workers who would have a better understanding of what a patient needs. While looking over their 2016 IRS 990 form, which can be found through Charity Navigator, I thought it would be important to mention that a breakdown of their expenses for 2016 showed that 63.2% of funds went towards families, 22.05% went towards fundraising, and 14.7% went to overhead costs. Although we’ve discussed that ideally an organization should be spending more than 70% on their programs, it’s important to note that the organization brought in nearly three times the amount they spent on fundraising; making a net fundraising income of $319,265. The organization also meets several of the criteria we have looked for in previous organizations. Indicated on their 990 is that The Red Devils has no material diversion of assets, an independent voting board, documented meetings shared with the governing body, a written conflict of interest policy and whistleblower policy amongst its staff, and a records retention and destruction policy.

     The last point I want to make about The Red Devils is that each and every person who works with them has a shared passion. The name of the organization itself pays homage to the chemotherapy drugs many breast cancer patients know as “The Red Devil” because of its bright red color and its substantial toll on the body. I’ve met many people who have worked for or in association with The Red Devils. Some have come from businesses and others from the participating hospitals, but we all share the same scars. Breast cancer links us like a lifeline. Many a time my family and I found these people to be like our life preserver when we were being dragged out to sea. That first year we almost didn’t celebrate Christmas, but we were connected with a group of women who came over to decorate the house, bring us gifts, and give us food for a Christmas dinner. Later, my mother, who only had a learner’s permit at the time, was desperate to get to a doctor’s appointment. She ended up in a car accident because she couldn’t find anyone else to drive her. The X-rays from her accident revealed that her cancer had returned. We were almost instantaneously connected with a woman who could drive my mom to her appointments and treatments from then on. My mother’s cancer brought us into a much broader community- one that The Red Devils are a big part of in Maryland. Without them it would be like a sinking ship with no life rafts; thousands left to drown at sea. Breast cancer is a fast-acting disease that can get progressively worse every day that a patient goes without treatment. Our donation would go directly to a breast cancer family ensuring that they can receive the most stress-free treatment as soon as possible.  We could provide the life raft that prevents them from drifting out to sea.

For more information on The Red Devils visit: https://www.the-red-devils.org/about-us/


*they are not rated on Charity Navigator because they do not have more than $1M in annual revenue

For more on my family’s journey with cancer:




Gift of Life charity pitch


Every four minutes in the United States, a patient is diagnosed with blood cancer; that is 360 people a day and 130,000 people each year. The three main types of blood cancer are Leukemia, Lymphoma and Myeloma, which attack blood, lymphatic system and bone marrow, respectively. Unlike other cancers, blood cancers will cause the growth of abnormal blood cells, which may prevent a person from being able to fight off infections, expediting their inevitable mortality. The treatment from other cancers though is very different; a lot of the time to complement the chemotherapy or, in many cases, to replace it, healthy blood cells can be taken from a donor to replace the sick ones in a patient. This is where people can run into complications. Unlike normal blood donations, where two people need just to have the same blood type, in order to be a bone marrow donor, the two participants must be perfect genetic matches for each other.

The test to see if you’re are a perfect match for someone is fast and simple. Cotton swabs are used to swab the insides of your cheek; this collects stem cells which determine results; the Gift of Life Bone Marrow Registry provides little envelopes with all the necessary materials needed to run these tests. Testing one person’s stem cells costs $60, but there are monetary donors who subsidize this cost for people under the age of 45, paying the cost in its entirety. I do understand that our money, if we chose to give to the Gift of Life, would only be able to pay for the testing for maybe two people, but there’s no way to say that that last person won’t be somebody’s perfect match.

Jay Feinberg was diagnosed with leukemia in 1991. After having held bone marrow drives around the country, and having swabbed tens of thousands of people, it was the very last woman at the very last drive, after four years of searching, that ended up being a perfect match for Jay. The bone marrow transplant was a complete success and even after he was better, continued the search for others, having founded Gift of Life. I had the pleasure of meeting Jay when he came to visit Binghamton last year and became inspired by his story. I have since worked with the Gift of Life Campus ambassadors on our campus, assisting in swabbing hundreds of students. This is an organization that does great work and has helped save the lives of thousands of people, I believe it is deserving of a donation from our class.


https://www.giftoflife.org/

Collective Impact: A New Method of Fighting Poverty?


Hello Everyone,

In 2013, India issued an interesting form of legislation designed to help the country’s poor. The Companies Act requires firms that make at least $130 million in revenue to give at least 2 percent of that revenue to charity. “Corporate Social Responsibility” was enacted in response to an increase in the wealth gap between the country’s rich, known as “the millionaire club,” and the rest of society. The theory behind the law was to not only increase the economic well-being of those living in poverty, but to also decrease the large gap between the social classes. This law is the first of its kind across the globe, and it remains to be seen how it has actually affected the nation.

A large wealth gap is a phenomenon that can also be seen in the United States. The difference between our country and India, however, is that we have the largest wealth gap of any nation in the world. As of 2017 the top 1 percent of Americans owned 40 percent of the country’s wealth. This is 15 percent higher than the top 1 percent of any other industrialized nation. If you consider the top 20 percent of Americans, they control 90 percent of the country’s wealth. While those are staggering statistics, the worst part is that the gap is getting bigger and could potentially have negative effects on the economy in the future. 

Not only does a large wealth gap represent income inequality, but it also causes inequality in the opportunities available based on income. Basically, the country’s poor have less opportunity than the rich because of the lack of resources, and therefore have decreased social mobility. This is a means for the rich to continue getting richer while the poor are socioeconomically stuck, and could potentially fall into deeper levels of poverty.

Now, as the problem continues to get worse, it is obvious that neither the government nor philanthropists have been able to make a drastic change in the overpowering inequality of society. Unfortunately, the government’s new tax plan will effectively help the rich continue to get richer, and widen the gap even further. On the other hand, the actions of philanthropists, while helpful, will not create the necessary nationwide change in the near future. If we want to help our poor now, is it necessary for the two entities to combine in a manner similar to what was done in India? I would argue that they do, as we’ve seen that collective impact has the potential to create better, and more effective solutions.

The only problem with following India’s plan is that it resembles a tax on large businesses. Anyone who understands economics would know that implementing higher taxes on those businesses will cause inefficiencies in the market, as well as a possible increase in poverty in the long run. What I think would be an interesting policy in America, related to Jack’s post last week about incentives, is the possibility of providing additional positive incentives for big businesses‒and even the country’s rich‒to donate to the poor. For example, what if the government provided tax breaks or subsidies to corporations that donated a specific percentage of their revenue to those affected by poverty? This reduction in taxes would be in addition to what is already offered by the government to those who donate to charity. These donations do not have to be money, but could be in the form of products or even new training programs and internships that teach new skills to those in need.

The goal of such a system is not for every member of society to have equal shares of the country’s wealth, as that destroys the incentive to produce in a capitalistic economy. The best result would be a society where the economy’s poor gain the means to create the same opportunities as the rest of society‒or at least, more opportunities than what are currently available to them. While it is possible that such a plan will not be enough, and may not even make a difference, I think it would be interesting to see how society would respond. Do you think such a policy would make a difference? Or do you think more of an incentive needed to make big corporations give to those in need?

Links and Sources:

Companies Act:

Wealth Gap:

Poverty: