No result found
Funders for LGBTQ Issues;
In 2018, Funders for LGBTQ Issues set out to survey the board and staff of foundations in order to identify how many LGBTQ people worked in philanthropy — which resulted in The Philanthropic Closet: LGBTQ People in Philanthropy.
In designing the survey, we realized that we had an opportunity to not only ask about sexual orientation and gender identity but also to inquire about a range of personal identifiers. With the inaugural Diversity Among Philanthropic Professionals (DAPP) Survey, we asked participants to identify their role within their foundation, their age, gender identity, sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, and disability status. This report lays out the results of the DAPP survey in aggregate form.
Produced in partnership with CHANGE Philanthropy and Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy (EPIP), the report and accompanying infographic explore diversity in the philanthropic workforce. Overall, the report finds a statistically significant difference between funders with a social justice focus and all other funders. Social justice funders were much more likely to have higher representation of LGBTQ people, people of color, and people with disabilities.
The report finds:
People of color accounted for 37.8 percent of people on the staff or board of participating foundations.
However, the percentage varied depending on a foundation's focus. People of color made up 45.6 percent of the staff and board at foundations with a social justice focus, while they accounted for 33.0 percent of staff and board at foundations with another focus.
While women accounted for nearly 70 percent of the staff and board at all participating foundations, only 44 percent of board members were women.
Nearly half of women at foundations with a social justice focus were women of color; only a third of women at foundations with another focus were women of color.
Among lesbian, gay, and bisexual people in philanthropy, 43.1 percent of those at foundations with a social justice focus were people of color, compared to one-third of those at foundations with another focus.
Among transgender people, 57.1 percent of transgender people at foundations with a social justice focus were people of color, while 25 percent of transgender people at foundations with another focus were people of color.
At foundations with a social justice focus, people with disabilities made up 8.8 percent of staff and boards, compared to 4.8 percent at foundations with another focus.
Across all participating foundations, 10.3 percent of staff and board were born outside of the United States.
Illinois is home to over 5,200 active grantmaking foundations spanning all types—independent or family, corporate, community, and operating—sizes, and issue areas. The community includes many foundations that only give locally or within the state, as well as those that fund nationally and even internationally. Giving in Illinois provides an overview of the scale and composition of the Illinois foundation community and grantmaking priorities of foundations funding in Illinois.
European Foundation Centre (EFC);
30 years. 30 contributors. 30 takes on the future of philanthropy.
With so many complex and urgent challenges facing contemporary society, clearly treading water isn't enough. How can philanthropy adapt to tackle these challenges head on? How can the EFC be the catalyst in this process?The answers to these questions are going to be critical.This commemorative book, marking 30 years since the establishment of the European Foundation Centre, turns to some of the most influential thought leaders on philanthropy from around the world to have their say on the future of the EFC and the wider philanthropic sector.
Carnegie Corporation of New York;
There is a new urgency today for American philanthropies to protect the right to vote for all eligible citizens. The philanthropic community has worked alongside the government to protect these rights for decades, but since a 2013 Supreme Court ruling eliminated key parts of the Voting Rights Act, there has been a dramatic increase across the country in barriers to voting. These new barriers often disproportionately affect low-income voters, rural voters, communities of color, young people, and people with disabilities.
American philanthropies now have an opportunity to protect and strengthen U.S. democracy by providing badly needed investments in the country's voting infrastructure, paying attention to these issues beyond election time, and joining with others to support litigation against illegal voting barriers.
Sillerman Center for the Advancement of Philanthropy;
Social Justice Funders Spotlights present stories of innovative, effective social justice philanthropy in action. Each spotlight focuses upon a grantmaker and a grantee.
Disability Rights FundThis spotlight is part of Sillerman's Participatory Grantmaking project.
Institute for Transportation and Development Policy;
While momentum in recent decades has elevated bus rapid transit (BRT) as more than an emerging mode in the U.S., this high-capacity, high-quality bus-based mass transit system remains largely unfamiliar to most Americans. In the U.S., lack of clarity and confusion around what constitutes BRT stems both from its relatively low profile (most Americans have never experienced BRT) and its vague and often conflicting sets of definitions across cities, sectors, and levels of government. As a result, many projects that would otherwise be labeled as bus improvements or bus priority under international standards have become branded in American cities as BRT. This leads to misperceptions among U.S. decisionmakers and the public about what to expect from BRT. Since its inception in Curitiba, Brazil, BRT has become a fixture of urban transport systems in more than 70 cities on six continents throughout the globe. Just twelve BRT corridors exist in the United States so far.
This guide offers proven strategies and insights for successfully implementing BRT within the political, regulatory, and social context that is unique to the United States. This guide seeks to illuminate the upward trends and innovations of BRT in U.S. cities. Through three in-depth case studies and other examples, the guide shares the critical lessons learned by several cities that have successfully implemented, or are in the midst of completing, their own BRT corridors. Distinct from previous BRT planning and implementation guides, this is a practical resource to help planners, and policy makers specifically working within the U.S. push beyond the parameters of bus priority and realize the comprehensive benefits of true BRT.
In 2015, familiar threats to human rights and human rights philanthropy continued. As conflicts persisted in countries like Syria, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic, the number of refugees fleeing violence and hunger soared. Extremist groups perpetrated mass violence from Nigeria and Egypt, to Kenya and France, including the targeted killing of staff from the French magazine Charlie Hedbo. Threats to closing civic space intensified as more countries adopted laws targeting and restricting organizations that work to hold governments accountable, including the funders that back them, often under the pretext of counterterrorism.
Despite these many concerns, we saw inspiring advances for human rights around the world across a range of issues. Women in Saudi Arabia voted and stood for election for the very first time, and the governments of the Gambia and Nigeria outlawed female genital mutilation. The Supreme Court in the United States legalized same sex marriage, while the Irish people did so through a historic popular vote. Cuba and the U.S. restored diplomatic ties after more than five decades, and Iran signed a deal to curb its nuclear program. At the end of the year, nearly 200 countries reached the landmark Paris Agreement on climate change to mitigate global warming.
Against this backdrop, in 2015 foundations allocated a total of $2.4 billion in support of human rights.
The Minnesota Department of Human Services Behavioral Health Home Services model serves children and adults with serious mental illness and their families with a multi-disciplinary team using a collaborative, person-centered, strength-based approach. BHH services aim to address the comprehensive physical, behavioral health, and social service needs of individuals in a holistic, coordinated manner. This is a report on the implementation of the behavioral health home services model in Minnesota.
The Advancing Human Rights initiative documents the landscape of foundation funding for human rights and track changes in its scale and priorities. This annual report uses grants data to map philanthropic support for specific human rights issues, funding strategies, and populations and regions served in 2016. In this year, 785 funders made over 23,000 grants totalling $2.8 billion for human rights.
Heartland Alliance for Human Needs & Human Rights;
In Illinois, nearly 5 million adults, 50% of the population, are estimated to have an arrest or conviction record. Housing is foundational for employment success, family stability, and overall well-being. Unfortunately, criminal history checks are a typical part of the housing application processes, and many people with records are declined housing opportunities they would otherwise be a good fit for, but for the criminal record.
Our goal for Win-Win was to develop user-friendly guidance about the use of criminal records in screening and housing applicants, and to provide recommendations that housing providers can adopt and adapt, in whole or in part, to increase housing opportunities for people with criminal records.
Philanthropy for Social Justice and Peace;
Individual giving in India, Russia, the Arab region and Brazil is part of PSJP's Philanthropy Study. Previously the study has focused on producing a series of papers on philanthropy in four emerging market countries/regions – India, Russia, the Arab region and Brazil. These studies have taken a broad view of philanthropy, encompassing everything from individual giving (by the very wealthy and by people of more modest means, including crowdfunding) to giving by private and corporate foundations, CSR, community philanthropy, social justice philanthropy, self-funded movements and impact investing.
The current paper looks at individual giving by ordinary people in these countries/ regions in more depth. Seen as an area of great promise in India and Russia, it is at an earlier stage in Brazil. In the Arab region giving to the social sector is barely making headway, though traditional giving is very much alive.
Despite the fact that one-in-five people in America has a disability and the Americans with Disabilities Act (prohibiting discrimination based on disability) has been law of the land for nearly 30 years, people with disabilities are not fully welcomed, respected, accepted or included in our work and communities. This is true even in the places where you think they would be – at foundations and nonprofits.
Nonprofits and foundations are full of good work and good will. Nearly three-quarters (72 percent) of people who work in the social sector say their organizations have a made a public commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and have policies that prohibit the group from denying people with disabilities equal opportunity to participate in services and activities. This new study, "Disability in Philanthropy & Nonprofits: A Study on the Inclusion and Exclusion of the 1-in-5 People Who Live with a Disability and What You Can Do to Make Things Better," examines the current landscape of disability inclusion in nonprofits and foundations, as well as what is working, what helps, and how we can all do better.