Fresh Research, a NonProfit Times Podcast

More charitable giving than ever is coming from high-income households while the donor universe has been shrinking for years. Those are some of the concerns identified in “Gilded Giving 2018: Top Heavy Philanthropy and Its Perils to the Independent Sector and Democracy.” Chuck Collins directs the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. He co-authored the report with Josh Hoxie and Helen Flannery. He discusses some of the findings, such as, households earning $200,000 or more now account for more than half of charitable deductions, compared with 30 percent in the early 2000s; and the number of households giving to charity declined from 66 percent to 55 percent between 2000 and 2014. He also talks about the reports recommendations, including a universal charitable deduction, setting a lifetime cap on tax-deductible charitable giving and reforming rules around donor-advised funds (DAF). *** Giving collectives are estimated to have donated as much as $1.3 billion to charity over the years. “Giving Circle Membership: How Collective Giving Impacts Donors” is a recent report from the Collective Giving Research Group. Julia Carboni is an assistant professor, public administration and public affairs, at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University.  Jessica Bearman is principal of Bearman Consulting. They are among the founding members of the Collective Giving Research Group, along with

More charitable giving than ever is coming from high-income households while the donor universe has been shrinking for years. Those are some of the concerns identified in “Gilded Giving 2018: Top Heavy Philanthropy and Its Perils to the Independent Sector and Democracy.” Chuck Collins directs the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. He co-authored the report with Josh Hoxie and Helen Flannery. He discusses some of the findings, such as, households earning $200,000 or more now account for more than half of charitable deductions, compared with 30 percent in the early 2000s; and the number of households giving to charity declined from 66 percent to 55 percent between 2000 and 2014. He also talks about the reports recommendations, including a universal charitable deduction, setting a lifetime cap on tax-deductible charitable giving and reforming rules around donor-advised funds (DAF). *** Giving collectives are estimated to have donated as much as $1.3 billion to charity over the years. “Giving Circle Membership: How Collective Giving Impacts Donors” is a recent report from the Collective Giving Research Group. Julia Carboni is an assistant professor, public administration and public affairs, at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University.  Jessica Bearman is principal of Bearman Consulting. They are among the founding members of the Collective Giving Research Group, along with

http://www.thenonprofittimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Fresh-Research-Episode-11.mp3 Part 1: Robert Grimm & Nathan Dietz Where are America’s volunteers? That’s literally the question posed, and answered, by a new study from the Do Good Institute at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy: “Where Are America’s Volunteers? A Look At America’s Widespread Decline in Volunteering in Cities and States.” Robert Grimm, director of the Do Good Institute, and Nathan Dietz, associate research scholar, examine volunteer rates from 2002 to 2015, down to a state, county and metro level. They found declining numbers nationwide, including a drop in volunteering rates across 31 states, including historically volunteer-rich states like Minnesota and Utah. Not one state saw an increase in the volunteer rate. Rural and suburban areas, which historically have higher levels of social capital than urban areas, saw the biggest declines, down about 5 percent between 2004 and 2015. Volunteer rates tended to drop in metropolitan areas with fewer places to volunteer, in places where people may be less likely to know their neighbors, and in places where there is more economic distress. Part 2: Lyle Matthew Kan One out of 10 LGBTQ people said they have left their job at a nonprofit due to an environment that was “not very accepting.” As many as one-third said they were depressed at work because of an unwelcoming work environment. Lyle Matthew Kan is director of research and communications at Funders for LGBTQ Issues. He discusses  

https://www.thenonprofittimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Fresh-Research-Episode-11.mp3 Part 1: Robert Grimm & Nathan Dietz Where are America’s volunteers? That’s literally the question posed, and answered, by a new study from the Do Good Institute at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy: “Where Are America’s Volunteers? A Look At America’s Widespread Decline in Volunteering in Cities and States.” Robert Grimm, director of the Do Good Institute, and Nathan Dietz, associate research scholar, examine volunteer rates from 2002 to 2015, down to a state, county and metro level. They found declining numbers nationwide, including a drop in volunteering rates across 31 states, including historically volunteer-rich states like Minnesota and Utah. Not one state saw an increase in the volunteer rate. Rural and suburban areas, which historically have higher levels of social capital than urban areas, saw the biggest declines, down about 5 percent between 2004 and 2015. Volunteer rates tended to drop in metropolitan areas with fewer places to volunteer, in places where people may be less likely to know their neighbors, and in places where there is more economic distress. Part 2: Lyle Matthew Kan One out of 10 LGBTQ people said they have left their job at a nonprofit due to an environment that was “not very accepting.” As many as one-third said they were depressed at work because of an unwelcoming work environment. Lyle Matthew Kan is director of research and communications at Funders for LGBTQ Issues

https://www.thenonprofittimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Fresh-Research-Episode10.mp3 Part 1: Libbie Landles-Cobb Only about half of nonprofits surveyed agreed that their executive team communicates to others. Two-thirds agreed that their teams focus on the right work or use their time effectively. Now, that’s not Michael Scott-level executive management but it could use some work. The Bridgespan Group has come up with what it calls the first comprehensive study of effective executive teams. “Increasing Nonprofit Executive Team Effectiveness” was written by Libbie Landles-Cobb, a partner in the San Francisco office, is co-author, along with Henry Barmier and Kirk Kramer. The results draw on a diagnostic survey of more than 360 nonprofit executive team respondents and dozens of interviews with nonprofit CEOs, coaches and consultants. Bridgespan created a sequence of five steps, formulated as questions, that executive teams can implement as a guide to increase their overall effectiveness: Is the CEO effectively managing the executive team? Is the executive team focused on the most important work? Does executive team composition support its ability to do the work Do meeting and communication processes support superior decision and execution? Does the team’s dynamic foster the right conversations and results? Part 2: Nicolas Duquette Nicolas Duquette, an assistant professor at the Sol Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California (USC), recently published “Inequality and Philanthropy: High-Income Giving in the United States 1917-2012.” The paper looks at giving and income of top income groups over the past 95 years, including giving versus inequality and giving versus tax rates of the top 0.1 percent of tax returns. He found that giving by high-income households has moved inversely with income inequality and talks about some other observations from looking at different periods of time within the past century. He also discusses some theories on what impact the changes from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act might have on charitable giving this year and next.

http://www.thenonprofittimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Fresh-Research-Episode10.mp3 Part 1: Libbie Landles-Cobb Only about half of nonprofits surveyed agreed that their executive team communicates to others. Two-thirds agreed that their teams focus on the right work or use their time effectively. Now, that’s not Michael Scott-level executive management but it could use some work. The Bridgespan Group has come up with what it calls the first comprehensive study of effective executive teams. “Increasing Nonprofit Executive Team Effectiveness” was written by Libbie Landles-Cobb, a partner in the San Francisco office, is co-author, along with Henry Barmier and Kirk Kramer. The results draw on a diagnostic survey of more than 360 nonprofit executive team respondents and dozens of interviews with nonprofit CEOs, coaches and consultants. Bridgespan created a sequence of five steps, formulated as questions, that executive teams can implement as a guide to increase their overall effectiveness: Is the CEO effectively managing the executive team? Is the executive team focused on the most important work? Does executive team composition support its ability to do the work Do meeting and communication processes support superior decision and execution? Does the team’s dynamic foster the right conversations and results? Part 2: Nicolas Duquette Nicolas Duquette, an assistant professor at the Sol Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California (USC), recently published “Inequality and Philanthropy: High-Income Giving in the United States 1917-2012.” The paper looks at giving and income of top income groups over the past 95 years, including giving versus inequality and giving versus tax rates of the top 0.1 percent of tax returns. He found that giving by high-income households has moved inversely with income inequality and talks about some other observations from looking at different periods of time within the past century. He also discusses some theories on what impact the changes from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act might have on charitable giving this year and next.

Part 1: Jason Coupet and Jessica Haynie Nonprofit overhead seems to be the most popular way to evaluate nonprofits, although even watchdogs that made program and expense ratios a focus are trying to come up with other ways to measure an organization’s effectiveness. Jason Coupet, assistant professor in the department of public administration at North Carolina State University, and Jessica Haynie, a third-year doctoral candidate, poke holes in the idea of nonprofit overhead as a way to rate a charity but also come up with alternatives. Their paper titled “Toward a valid approach to nonprofit efficiency measurement” first was published in the journal, Nonprofit Management & Leadership. The duo used financial and operational data to rank the efficiency of hundreds of Habitat for Humanity affiliates using the overhead ratio but also employed two economic models that measure efficiency: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA). Part 2: Heather Mansfield and Jim LeFevre The 2018 Global Trends in Giving Report surveyed more than 6,000 donors in 119 countries. It asked donors of all ages and backgrounds about everything from giving online and social media to crowdfunding, monthly giving, #GivingTuesday, and much more. Heather Mansfield, founder of Nonprofit Tech for Good, and Jim LeFevre, senior director of marketing at Public Interest Registry, talk about just a few of the data points in the study that nonprofits should take note of ahead of this year’s giving season. There are statistics galore in the 28-page report, which breaks down responses by gender, generation, gift size, religion, and trends by continent, and concludes with 25 key findings. Some of the new questions in this year’s report include tribute gifts, how crowdfunding might affect the size of a gift donors make to a charity, and whether they use Facebook fundraisers. The Global Trends in Giving Report is a sister publication of the Global NGO Technology Report.

Part 1: Jason Coupet and Jessica Haynie Nonprofit overhead seems to be the most popular way to evaluate nonprofits, although even watchdogs that made program and expense ratios a focus are trying to come up with other ways to measure an organization’s effectiveness. Jason Coupet, assistant professor in the department of public administration at North Carolina State University, and Jessica Haynie, a third-year doctoral candidate, poke holes in the idea of nonprofit overhead as a way to rate a charity but also come up with alternatives. Their paper titled “Toward a valid approach to nonprofit efficiency measurement” first was published in the journal, Nonprofit Management & Leadership. The duo used financial and operational data to rank the efficiency of hundreds of Habitat for Humanity affiliates using the overhead ratio but also employed two economic models that measure efficiency: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA). Part 2: Heather Mansfield and Jim LeFevre The 2018 Global Trends in Giving Report surveyed more than 6,000 donors in 119 countries. It asked donors of all ages and backgrounds about everything from giving online and social media to crowdfunding, monthly giving, #GivingTuesday, and much more. Heather Mansfield, founder of Nonprofit Tech for Good, and Jim LeFevre, senior director of marketing at Public Interest Registry, talk about just a few of the data points in the study that nonprofits should take note of ahead of this year’s giving season. There are statistics galore in the 28-page report, which breaks down responses by gender, generation, gift size, religion, and trends by continent, and concludes with 25 key findings. Some of the new questions in this year’s report include tribute gifts, how crowdfunding might affect the size of a gift donors make to a charity, and whether they use Facebook fundraisers. The Global Trends in Giving Report is a sister publication of the Global NGO Technology Report.

Part 1: Rebecca Nesbit and Laurie Paarlberg Hardly a day goes by when someone isn’t questioning whether there are too many nonprofits in the United States. True, there are more than 1.5 million organizations, twice as many as two decades ago, but a group of researchers looked beyond the aggregate numbers to try to answer the question: Are there too many nonprofits? “A Field Too Crowded? How Measures of Market Structure Shape Nonprofit Fiscal Health” was published earlier this year in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, a publication of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA). In the first segment of this episode, we talk with Rebecca Nesbit, Ph.D., associate professor in the Department of Public Administration and Policy at the University of Georgia’s School of Public & International Affairs, and Laurie Paarlberg, Ph.D., the Charles Stewart Mott Chair on Community Foundations at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. They were joined in the research by Robert Christensen, Seung Ho-An and Justin Bullock. Keep an eye out for the October issue of The NonProfit Times for a more in-depth story on this study. Part 2: Mirae Kim Small nonprofits find themselves in a classic chicken-and-egg dilemma. They need full-time staff to build organizational collaboration but they need to invest in full-time staff to form and maintain collaborations. A recent study found that nonprofits with at least one full-time staff member are much more likely than those without any full-time staff “to be involved in formal collaborations that can help them obtain funding and meet client needs.” Mirae Kim, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Public Management and Policy at the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University, leads the Nonprofit Organization Research Panel (NORP). With Shuyang Peng of the University of New Mexico, she researched human resources capacity and collaboration among 229 human service nonprofits with annual gross receipts of less than $500,000.

Part 1: Rebecca Nesbit and Laurie Paarlberg Hardly a day goes by when someone isn’t questioning whether there are too many nonprofits in the United States. True, there are more than 1.5 million organizations, twice as many as two decades ago, but a group of researchers looked beyond the aggregate numbers to try to answer the question: Are there too many nonprofits? “A Field Too Crowded? How Measures of Market Structure Shape Nonprofit Fiscal Health” was published earlier this year in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, a publication of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA). In the first segment of this episode, we talk with Rebecca Nesbit, Ph.D., associate professor in the Department of Public Administration and Policy at the University of Georgia’s School of Public & International Affairs, and Laurie Paarlberg, Ph.D., the Charles Stewart Mott Chair on Community Foundations at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. They were joined in the research by Robert Christensen, Seung Ho-An and Justin Bullock. Keep an eye out for the October issue of The NonProfit Times for a more in-depth story on this study. Part 2: Mirae Kim Small nonprofits find themselves in a classic chicken-and-egg dilemma. They need full-time staff to build organizational collaboration but they need to invest in full-time staff to form and maintain collaborations. A recent study found that nonprofits with at least one full-time staff member are much more likely than those without any full-time staff “to be involved in formal collaborations that can help them obtain funding and meet client needs.” Mirae Kim, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Public Management and Policy at the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University, leads the Nonprofit Organization Research Panel (NORP). With Shuyang Peng of the University of New Mexico, she researched human resources capacity and collaboration among 229 human service nonprofits with annual gross receipts of less than $500,000.

Some 10,000 Baby Boomers will turn 65 every day for at least the next decade, and those older than 65 already represent about 15 percent of the total population. With that in mind, the Women’s Philanthropy Institute (WPI) released “How Women & Men Give Around Retirement” to help the philanthropy sector understand more about how women and men give around retirement since Baby Boomers not only make up the largest section of philanthropic giving but many are now in or approaching their golden years. Debra Mesch, professor of philanthropic studies and the Eileen Lamb O’Gara Chair in Women’s Philanthropy at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University, talks about the findings within the 32-page report that examines how women and men give around retirement. The study did not look at planning giving but focused on annual giving and consumption trends among retirees. Mesch shares some of what fundraisers and charities should be aware of when it comes to giving and volunteering by married couples, single men and single women. *** If donors were just provided all the right information about how effective a nonprofit is, surely they would give to the most effective charities, right? Maybe. But maybe not. Deborah Small, professor of marketing and psychology at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, and co-authors Jonathan Berman, Alixandra Barasch and Emma Levine, examine the extent to which effectiveness information leads people to choose more effective charities in “Impediments to Effective Altruism: The Role of Subjective Preferences in Charitable Giving.” Despite being provided with relevant information on effectiveness of a charity, donors still tend to give to organizations that they want to give to, whether they have  a connection to it or one that tugs their heartstrings. Effectiveness information has limited impact on donor decisions although Small presents two scenarios in the research in which donors did tilt toward effectiveness when giving.

Some 10,000 Baby Boomers will turn 65 every day for at least the next decade, and those older than 65 already represent about 15 percent of the total population. With that in mind, the Women’s Philanthropy Institute (WPI) released “How Women & Men Give Around Retirement” to help the philanthropy sector understand more about how women and men give around retirement since Baby Boomers not only make up the largest section of philanthropic giving but many are now in or approaching their golden years. Debra Mesch, professor of philanthropic studies and the Eileen Lamb O’Gara Chair in Women’s Philanthropy at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University, talks about the findings within the 32-page report that examines how women and men give around retirement. The study did not look at planning giving but focused on annual giving and consumption trends among retirees. Mesch shares some of what fundraisers and charities should be aware of when it comes to giving and volunteering by married couples, single men and single women. *** If donors were just provided all the right information about how effective a nonprofit is, surely they would give to the most effective charities, right? Maybe. But maybe not. Deborah Small, professor of marketing and psychology at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, and co-authors Jonathan Berman, Alixandra Barasch and Emma Levine, examine the extent to which effectiveness information leads people to choose more effective charities in “Impediments to Effective Altruism: The Role of Subjective Preferences in Charitable Giving.” Despite being provided with relevant information on effectiveness of a charity, donors still tend to give to organizations that they want to give to, whether they have  a connection to it or one that tugs their heartstrings. Effectiveness information has limited impact on donor decisions although Small presents two scenarios in the research in which donors did tilt toward effectiveness when giving.

Online fundraising trends continue to point to growth within mobile, so it’s not a surprise to see another study confirming what’s been happening of late. “The State of Modern Philanthropy: Examining Online Fundraising Trends,” from San Diego, Calif.-based Classy,  examines data from more than 3,500 organizations and more than 2.5 million donations. It’s no surprise that mobile continues to grow but there’s a lot more to digest in the study.  Ben Cippolini, director engineering and data insights, and Carilu Dietrich, chief marketing officer, talk about some the more under-the-radar data points in Classy’s first-ever report, including donor retention, particularly as it relates to Giving Tuesday, and some of the things charities should be thinking about when it comes to donor retention. The 62-page report can be downloaded here. Fast Forward, a San Francisco, Calif.-based accelerator for tech nonprofits, also released its first-ever report examining the state of the nonprofit tech sector. Christina Shatzen, director of marking and communications at Fast Forward, joins the program in the second segment to discuss the findings in “The State of Diversity and Funding in the Nonprofit Tech Sector.” The good news: Gender and racial or ethnic diversity is much more common among nonprofit tech founders as compare with those in the for-profit tech space. On the other hand, women make up only 28 percent of the engineering teams at tech nonprofits. Overall, tech nonprofits struggle to make the leap from “seed” stage funding to budgets of $1 million; a level only reached by about a third of tech nonprofits. Data were analyzed from 348 tech nonprofits compiled into Fast Forward’s Global Tech Nonprofit Directory. The seven-page report can be downloaded here. Fast Forward also recently announced its 2018 accelerator cohort. Each of the 10 tech nonprofits will receive a $25,000 grant; three months of curated training; meetings with more than 100 mentors, access to their peer community; and two Demo Days, where they pitch to hundreds of philanthropists, funders and leaders in corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Online fundraising trends continue to point to growth within mobile, so it’s not a surprise to see another study confirming what’s been happening of late. “The State of Modern Philanthropy: Examining Online Fundraising Trends,” from San Diego, Calif.-based Classy,  examines data from more than 3,500 organizations and more than 2.5 million donations. It’s no surprise that mobile continues to grow but there’s a lot more to digest in the study.  Ben Cippolini, director engineering and data insights, and Carilu Dietrich, chief marketing officer, talk about some the more under-the-radar data points in Classy’s first-ever report, including donor retention, particularly as it relates to Giving Tuesday, and some of the things charities should be thinking about when it comes to donor retention. The 62-page report can be downloaded here. Fast Forward, a San Francisco, Calif.-based accelerator for tech nonprofits, also released its first-ever report examining the state of the nonprofit tech sector. Christina Shatzen, director of marking and communications at Fast Forward, joins the program in the second segment to discuss the findings in “The State of Diversity and Funding in the Nonprofit Tech Sector.” The good news: Gender and racial or ethnic diversity is much more common among nonprofit tech founders as compare with those in the for-profit tech space. On the other hand, women make up only 28 percent of the engineering teams at tech nonprofits. Overall, tech nonprofits struggle to make the leap from “seed” stage funding to budgets of $1 million; a level only reached by about a third of tech nonprofits. Data were analyzed from 348 tech nonprofits compiled into Fast Forward’s Global Tech Nonprofit Directory. The seven-page report can be downloaded here. Fast Forward also recently announced its 2018 accelerator cohort. Each of the 10 tech nonprofits will receive a $25,000 grant; three months of curated training; meetings with more than 100 mentors, access to their peer community; and two Demo Days, where they pitch to hundreds of philanthropists, funders and leaders in corporate social responsibility (CSR).

A flurry of natural disasters, a booming stock market and strong economy, and more mega gifts all contributed to another record year for charitable giving in 2017. Charitable giving in the United States hit another record, cracking the $400 billion level for the first time ever. Giving totaled more than $410 billion, an increase of more than 5 percent over 2016. The gains were seen virtually across the board, from arts and religion to education and human services, with only one subsector experiencing a decline. The Giving USA Foundation today released its initial estimates on overall giving for 2017, as well as revision to the 2016 estimates from a year ago. Aggie Sweeney, chair of the Giving USA Foundation and senior counsel for Campbell & Co., and Una Osili, Ph.D., associate dean for research and international programs at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, talk about some of the details in the report, the good news and bad news, what nonprofits should do with that information, and what 2018 might hold for charities. For more information on “Giving USA 2018: The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the year 2017,” visit givingusa.org *** Diversity has been a hot topic in the nonprofit sector for many years. Yet, only one in five CEO positions among nonprofits is held by a person of color. So, has anything really changed? Frances Kunreuther and Sean Thomas Breitfeld are co-directors of the Building Movement Project (BMP) and together authored “Race To Lead: Confronting the Nonprofit Racial Leadership Gap.” Among more than 4,000 respondents who work in the nonprofit sector, only 9 percent disagreed with the statement that one of the big problems is that nonprofit leadership doesn’t represent racial and ethnic diversity in the U.S. “What we found really stunned us, at least it stunned me,” Kunreuther said. To download a copy of the entire 26-page study, go to racetolead.org. For more episodes of Fresh Research, click here.