Is Your Foundation Smart or Just Rich?
Tom Vander Ark announced yesterday that he is resigning at the end of the year. Who's he, you might ask?
For the last seven years, Mr. Vander Ark might have been the most important person in the world in the field of public education. He has been the executive director of the Gates Foundation's education initiatives, and in that role, he oversaw the dispensation of about $3 billion in grants to students and schools.
I have no idea if Mr. Vander Ark was any good at his job. I learned long ago, in a previous career, that whole scale education reform was outside my skill set. But I was struck by something Mr. Vander Ark said upon his resignation.
"I don't think anybody ought to run a big grant program forever," he said. "You start to lose touch with the field, and you confuse grantee interest with acceptance of your ideas. I think it's healthy to go back into the field where your ideas are market-tested."
I couldn't agree more. But next time you get a chance, check out the tenure of program officers at your favorite foundation. You'll find that Mr. Vander Ark's philosophy is not the norm.
Three other tidbits: 1) I spent the last 2 days visiting a charity in Salt Lake City, Utah. According to NewTithing Group, Utah has the most generous citizens in the United States, giving the largest percentage of their incomes away each year. 2) Check out the English equivalent of Charity Navigator (in spirit only--we have no formal relationship). I think it's smart, and cool. Good luck, gang. 3) For my friends in Arizona (or on the internet), I'll be on KTAR at 7:55 EST tomorrow morning.
For the last seven years, Mr. Vander Ark might have been the most important person in the world in the field of public education. He has been the executive director of the Gates Foundation's education initiatives, and in that role, he oversaw the dispensation of about $3 billion in grants to students and schools.
I have no idea if Mr. Vander Ark was any good at his job. I learned long ago, in a previous career, that whole scale education reform was outside my skill set. But I was struck by something Mr. Vander Ark said upon his resignation.
"I don't think anybody ought to run a big grant program forever," he said. "You start to lose touch with the field, and you confuse grantee interest with acceptance of your ideas. I think it's healthy to go back into the field where your ideas are market-tested."
I couldn't agree more. But next time you get a chance, check out the tenure of program officers at your favorite foundation. You'll find that Mr. Vander Ark's philosophy is not the norm.
Three other tidbits: 1) I spent the last 2 days visiting a charity in Salt Lake City, Utah. According to NewTithing Group, Utah has the most generous citizens in the United States, giving the largest percentage of their incomes away each year. 2) Check out the English equivalent of Charity Navigator (in spirit only--we have no formal relationship). I think it's smart, and cool. Good luck, gang. 3) For my friends in Arizona (or on the internet), I'll be on KTAR at 7:55 EST tomorrow morning.
posted by Trent Stamp at 1:13 PM
4 Comments:
Dave, editor of the UK's Intelligent Giving here. Thanks for the good wishes, Trent. We've been long-inspired by your success and influence. May we both help people give happily and with confidence...
The organization one should question is The Pink Door. It is trying to start up in the Detroit area.
The concept with this company is to get a hospital to pay a specific fee, say $15,000 per month and in return provide the hospital with payment for screening mamograms. Botsford Hospial in Detroit said no just 2 weeks ago.
This foundation was started with the thought of directly paying for the mammograms. Funding for followup care was the problem.
I would think that Karmanos or another high profile breast cancer org would be able to do this much more effectively.
Questions?
Excellent point about the need to stay in "touch" with the real world. It sure is easy to get lost in paperwork and statistics!
Matt
Breast Cancer org
Common Breast Cancer Myths
The first myth pertaining to this disease is that it only affects women.
Second myth that is associated with this disease is that if one has found a lump during an examination, it is cancer.
Third is that it is solely hereditary
The next myth associated with breast cancer is downright ridiculous. Would you believe, that in this day and age, some individuals still think that breast cancer is contagious?
Conversely, some individuals foolishly believe that breast size determines whether or not one gets cancer.
Finally, another myth that is associated with this disease is that it only affects older people. This is not so. Although the chance of getting breast cancer increases with age, women as young as 18 have been diagnosed with the disease.
You can find a number of helpful informative articles on Breast Cancer org at breast-cancer1.com
Breast Cancer org
Post a Comment
<< Home