Discussing Social Impact Assessment
"many social startups stall because they don't see themselves as a business"
NPR's Larry Abramson discusses social entrepreneurship, Ashoka, and a new direction for donors in this article. Search TRASI for "Ashoka" and you'll find their Measuring Effectiveness Questionnaire.
The quote above appears midway through the article. Do you agree or disagree with that statement?
Views: 42
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Brad Smith on -
This got me thinking in relation to a comment I saw over on the Foundation Center's Facebook Page http://www.facebook.com/foundationcenter
“Janet Denise Ganaway Kelly ...”
This is a very common complaint one hears these days from non-profits in a weak economy and it got me thinking about analogies with the private sector. No one really complains about their being too many businesses and there is an efficient, if cruel, mechanism for weeding the unsustainable ones out called “the market.” Anyway, if there are too many non-profits it has to do with the huge amount of need and the fact that they are funded by a less-than-rational patchwork of government contracts, individual contributions, foundation grants, etc. In a weak economy, it is understandable for donors to pull back as assets are under pressure, but is the right response to punish startups? If the private sector had that kind of reaction, it would kill off innovation, which usually starts small and on the fringes. My other musing had to do with the way the idea of a social capital marketplace could work against start ups. A start up can’t be rated by a Charity Navigator, would not have any reviews from Great Non-Profits, or might not even appear on Guidestar’s radar screen. And my definition, we wont really know whether a startup is effective or achieving the desired social impact until it is no longer a startup! Brad
-
Permalink Reply by Nina Gantcheva on -
Speaking of a social capital marketplace, the Social Impact Exchange (SIE) is trying to do just that - on a national level. (This PhilanTopic post explains what they hope to accomplish.) At NYU's Satter conference, I learned about a similar venture in Asia: the Asia Impact Investment Exchange. Naturally, both exchanges are looking to connect investors to high-impact initiatives, which, as you say, is not ideal for start-ups who haven't proven their impact.
What is a better scenario for start-ups to attract funders? Well, Jumo and Crowdrise are two candidates. Both let you create an online profile for your cause and use social media to fundraise and/or recruit volunteers. Which reminds me of a tweet I read today that points to a recent McKinsey study: "companies using social media are making more money." This comes back to the quote/title of this post. Social start-ups could benefit from following in (some of) the footsteps of successful businesses - for example, by harnessing the power of social media to increase their funding.
-
Permalink Reply by Janet Denise Kelly on
-
I don't necessarily agree. It is interesting to see my post in one of your replies. I think most start ups are stalling because philanthropists are redirecting their efforts to support existing organizations. I have found despite my track track record of creating new nonprofits and performing successfull nonprofit mergers, the reality is that it tougher for emerging nonprofits.The dollars aren't there and the need is great.
It's funny that I heard the same thing at a women philanthropy summit last night. I posed the question about investing in new nonprofits in high need areas. I got a similiar response that focusing on instracture building and new services are hard in this economic climate. And, the dollars are best served by saving fledging established agencies.
On the bright side, there are a few out there who are still holding on to their committment to provide seed funding. It is just that the pool isn't large anymore.
-
Permalink Reply by Brad Smith on
-
Denise,
As you can tell from my previous post on this chain (that displays in ridiculously large type), your post on our Facebook page (I am the President of the Foundation Center) really struck a chord with me. We hear this sentiment expressed frequently by nonprofit start ups in a weak economy. Though it is understandable that many funders might react that way, it is worrisome ifor what it might mean in terms of fostering the innovation we need to tackle the country's social problems.
Brad
Janet Denise Kelly said:I don't necessarily agree. It is interesting to see my post in one of your replies. I think most start ups are stalling because philanthropists are redirecting their efforts to support existing organizations. I have found despite my track track record of creating new nonprofits and performing successfull nonprofit mergers, the reality is that it tougher for emerging nonprofits.The dollars aren't there and the need is great.
It's funny that I heard the same thing at a women philanthropy summit last night. I posed the question about investing in new nonprofits in high need areas. I got a similiar response that focusing on instracture building and new services are hard in this economic climate. And, the dollars are best served by saving fledging established agencies.
On the bright side, there are a few out there who are still holding on to their committment to provide seed funding. It is just that the pool isn't large anymore.
© 2013 Created by TRASI.
