The New York Times has reported on September 29 on what should be treated as an abuse and consumer affairs matter that only public outcry can address -- "orphan trusts." 

These family foundations often began by being ca retaken by local banks with local advisory boards (alas, not created in community foundations) and ultimately through bank mergers and takeovers become income centers badly cared for to the appoint of abuse by the "winning" bank holder.  The end results, lots more money for banks, lots less money for the community and consequentially, borderline honoring of donor intentions.

Attorney Generals where are you? 

For the full article go to:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/29/us/29foundation.html?ex=1191729600&en=4b3378ff38c34c68&ei=5070&emc=eta1

In the nonprofit world, the CEO can opt to manage their board providing the information she/he thinks is necessary at the minimum to ensure the Board fulfills its fiduciary responsibility.  On those occasions when the Board is clear about a policy it wants defined and implemented, unless the CEO can prove potential harm, that policy is adopted.

So, why doesn't the US Government System function similarly?  Why is it that the US President can pretty much ignore his "bosses?"  This is surely the case with Iraq and now with children's health care.  In my consulting practice, nonprofit boards call me in to determine how responsive the CEO is to their call in addition to of course, pure performance issues.

Were I to be called in to this situation, what do you think I would have to recommend?

Nonprofit board meetings can be boring -- it's a simple fact. 

Today's "Cubicle Culture" in the Wall Street Journal had an interesting visit to the world of listening.  The column's author, Jared Sandberg, humorously and seriously told the story of his attendance at a Cornell University Industrial Labor Relations class titled "The Power of Listening."

My take away, here's a course all nonprofit board members would benefit from.

As Jared stated, "bad listeners often are rehearsing what they're about to say, grab every conversational opening and scout for flaws in an argument....The trick to listening better begins with readiness to listen.....The task of listening to understand rather than simply to reply has three key elements: Involved silence (eye contact, vocal encouragements), probes (supportive inquiry using questions like "what" as opposed to the aggressive "why") and paraphrasing ("What I think you said is....").  That last step shouldn't simply be spitting back what people say, but integrating information about the speaker's attitudes and feelings...." 

In my experience, nonprofit boards members are by-and-large not the best listeners.  Perhaps its the material/content; perhaps the presenter.  But nonprofit board members largely miss the boat and ultimately fail in fulfilling their fiduciary responsibilities and more important, become the true advocates of their nonprofit and their nonprofit's work.  Perhaps Mr. Sandberg's thoughts can provide a jumping off point.

Hm -- interesting concept "nonprofits should serve everyone equally..... alternatively, there should be no gaps of people or need left out by nonprofits."

That's my interpretation of a dialog reported by the Chronicle of Philanthropy and currently going on in the US Congress where legislators are considering changing the tax policy and equity of resource distribution/use (particularly geographic and demographic) is ...   more »

A Gallup Poll study today says that Gen Y-rs aren't thinking government service will be a good direction for them.  According to the Washington Post:

"Generation Y is an upbeat group that is not afraid to take risks, she said. "They are impatient and unwilling to take on jobs that they view as marking time. They are a generation that lives in the here and now. They are very oriented to immediacy and... they prefer jobs "where they feel something is getting accomplished" and "don't like jobs where they can't see the end in sight," she said.  They also are critical of inefficient organizations, which does not bode well for the government, given popular perceptions, she said. "They don't understand why it takes two hours to get back to them with an answer. They don't understand why we schedule meetings."

Nonprofit Boards who I believe set the tone for the kind of environment "their" nonprofit functions in should be aware of these trends along with the reality that a huge number of their execs are soon to retire.  There are big gaps coming and bigger gaps if the nonprofit sector mirrors in environment its sister government.  Nonprofit boards beware!

James P. Joseph (I believe formerly of the Independent Sector but now with the firm of Arnold & Porter) wrote a compelling article in September's Tax Exempt News about the IRS' newly issued guidelines on Governance for nonprofits.

Advice by the IRS includes guidelines on mission statements, codes of ethics and whistle blower policies, the duty of loyalty, due diligence, transparency, fund raising policies, financial audits, compensation practices, and documentation retention practices.

I think Mr. Joseph's summaries are great and note in particular his questions and answers about the role of the IRS in making suggestions about constitutes good governance.  Mr. Joseph concludes that the IRS has a vested interest in seeing nonprofits succeed and that the core of success is good governance. 

I agree on all counts.

The head of the Metropolitan Museum of Art makes, yes, wait for it, $4.5 million dollars!!!!!

Huh -- and there's how many people starving in America and how many bankruptcies and people losing their houses and .....

You do the math but is this guy worth any less than the heads of a GE or United Technologies?

So'd you hear the one about the fox -- the fox, left to guard the hen house can't help himself, walks in and takes the best hens.  Later, the owner of the hen house comes back and hires the fox to repair the gate and restore order to the hen house.

This is sort of the story that has recently taken place after months of discussion has resulted in ten foundations agreeing to establish a $100 million fund to help Detroit find a path to recovery away from auto manufacturing.  But, irony of ironies, the new leader of this initiative is Steve Hamp, former chief of staff to Ford Motor Co. chairman
Bill Ford.

So I suppose it makes sens to hire one of the industrial engineers who helped create the situation Detroit faces.  I suppose.

A deal is finally afoot for a nonprofit, broken down, out of money hospital in the DC area to be acquired by a for-profit hospital business.

Bad or good news for the beneficiaries?  Good question for which I can't provide a fully informed answer.  Politics aside (OK, so not necessarily possible) I believe that when a nonprofit board is saddled with failure, perhaps to its credit, its first obligation is to figuring out what is best for the public and whether it, with its own resources, can provide what is best.

In the situation in DC, it appears the current board can't pull this off any other way and if a for-profit can, then the board should lunge at the opportunity.  Anyway, hospital conversion funds have proved to be a great boon to the community to boot.

DC Hospital Board, ponder well and be sure that what you are about to do is indeed in the interest of your constituents, not your egos.

Today in the on-line Philanthropy Journal, Todd Cohen reviewed the happenings at the 2007 Nonprofit Leader Summit sponsored by Wachovia Nonprofit and Philanthropic Services. 

One big and important conclusion: nonprofits need competent leaders!  Not exactly what he said but my conclusion from Todd's review.  Absolutely, nonprofits need competent and qualified leaders and managers and as Todd notes from the various speakers, capacity building is essential. 

Yes, capacity building should include skill and systems development but should also include nonprofit Boards taking charge, being clear and setting about making their own footprint including selecting strong execs and removing less than competent execs!