If You Were the Non-Profit God, What Would You Fix – Part Deux

by Mike Shoemaker Aug 28th, 2009
StumbleUpon.com

traffic

This is Part II in a two-part series.  Check out Part I here.

So what’s the alternative? How can non-profits turn the model upside down?

In simple terms, non-profits can stop being the bottleneck! Rather than play the role of go-between, non-profits can facilitate interactions between donors and their target populations, similar to what Google and your radio do for advertisers and users.

Fair Trade Coffee provides a good example.

Pretend for a moment that you set up a non-profit to support coffee farmers in the developing world. In designing the model, you have a couple of options:

1. According to the traditional model, you might raise money from donors to provide free inputs to farmers, effectively subsidizing their work in order to make the farmers more competitive and profitable. Then, you would turn around and tell donors about the great work you’re doing in, say, El Salvador.

Or…

2. You could facilitate exchanges between coffee farmers and established coffee markets overseas where people are willing to pay more for coffee when they know their purchase is supporting a small farmer. In this case, the “charity” or “free” component is essentially the gap between the market price for coffee and what you, the non-profit wholesaler, and eventually the end consumer are willing to pay to make it a fair trade.

facilitator

In both cases, you effectively have charity – people’s altruistic motives and goodwill – at work. But again, what makes these models different is that the latter allows a more direct link to be created between the “donor” and the “charity recipient.” Ultimately, enhanced sustainability comes in the form of more engaged “donors” who are immediately experiencing the fruits of their philanthropy and receiving more in exchange for their giving than your stories of good deeds.  The “charity recipient,” for her part, is dealt with as a capable, responsible entrepreneur and not as a charity recipient at all, which is far more empowering and transformative.

This is social enterprise broadly defined.  If you haven’t already, start thinking about how you can leverage it in your non-profit.  It could be something as straightforward as Lutheran World Relief’s “Project Comfort” which calls on donors to sew quilts and create other “kits” for refugee families.  The program has been wildly successful, grassroots-driven, and sustainable, in part because it creates a tighter physical and emotional link between donors and aid recipients.   On the other hand, it could be something more complex and market-oriented, like The Ayllu Initiative’s mission to bring social enterprise to every community on earth by facilitating microfranchising.  Or it can be something wildly different and in-between.  What’s important is that you try a few things out and see for yourself what works.

Contributor Profile: Mike Shoemaker


Mike is a graduate of St. Olaf College in Minnesota and a former Fulbright Scholar at the Universidad de los Andes in Bogota, Colombia. Mike currently manages strategic alliances for a global consulting firm, is a volunteer and advisor to The Ayllu Initiative, and blogs at Human Ventures.
Twitter: @soccapital

You might also like

Redefining Philanthropy with Marian Moore – Part 2
In the second part of my interview with Marian Moore, Senior Advisor in Business Development for the...
If You Were the Non-Profit God, What Would You Fix?
Non-profits all over the world do some incredible work. From sheltering refugees to mediating community...
The Socially Conscious Book Club (Week 4): Green Baby Books
This week's book was chosen from a unique perspective, it isn't just about being green, it actually...
Obama Delivers $151M to Clean Technology
This Tuesday, the Department of Energy disbursed the first federal grants for clean technology in...
  • marinomangone
    To Whom it may concern, ALL,
    Has any real scientist/government done the real math or telling the true truths?You cannot develop the future, if you cannot get over the past! Why is it that governments are so frightened by progressing to global nuclear power (besides the obvious, the lack of FULL understanding of "one's mass of matter's energy"?)I can guarantee that when all the other known energy forces (or any mineral money power/energy) were discovered and the full understanding of the potential of that mass/matter everybody was scared too.That was until full understanding of that atom/s/mass of matter energy's RELEASE safely. (But if you call creating weapons/war/destruction/death ...from the resources developed..., instead of using the resources for developing infrastructure and developing people/nations...?) It is a known fact that the energy from nuclear power stations is one of the cleanest forms, and the energy from uranium vastly exceeds those of the majority of power station fuels. Approx. One ton uranium = ten million ton coal, (myself personally I think ten million is moderate estimate of the potential of actual nuclear fusion.)If only the scientists thought sphereical/gyroscopic design, instead of a doughnut when TRYING to attempt nuclear fusion.Instead of smashing atoms together to produce fusion, they should be MAGNETIZING the atom/s from each an every direction and facet known to the human being (North, East, West, South [N.E.W.S]) Spherically/gyroscopically (when focusing on the true spherical centre/nucleus of an atom/s)! Fusion will take place if the correct amount of magnetic force/pressure is applied in each and all directions, to each and all facets of the atom/s nucleus.You will be able to release a build up of energy/heat/light, by ways of magnetic/multitude of frequency waves using diodes (which you will then be able to reuse that energy, to re-power what is energizing the initial reaction to magnetize/suspend the atom/s) endless energy?When suspended in a spherical/gyroscopic magnetic field, magnetic force/pressure can be delivered evenly in all directions concievable and NONE of the atom/s matter/mass could escape and both energy's from the atom/s would be getting used/fused YES!E=M or energy = mass of matter (who cares if you cannot see it happening, the c [uh, the "light /heat/frequency etc" emitted from the initial reaction], you only square (c2) the speed of light, because you want to see/visulize it?Be happy, at least you can measure, control [eventually], then use.Remember, "for every action there is an EQUAL and OPPOSITE reaction" so if you capture and control both, then direct the force evenly who knows...?But that's another subject for a more mature time.Back to current nuclear power generation.You will tell me about the weapons that can be made from the waste and the potential for power plant disaster, I... well truthfully the weapons, that's everyone's governments/defense's fault (problem) if they never "thought" to use as it as a weapon, because they "thought they knew" the potential outcome of (destruction/power/energy) it produces or can yield if controlled...? On the potential for disaster? Research and development on the subject will yield huge results in safety and commercialization.Look at the oil/gas/coal power industries, they have already over developed their resource to the brink, time to share facts and fast track results ladies and gentleman! Yes, you will also then tell me what about the toxic waste, and I will say to you "how many used oil and gas wells are there?
    Why not pump the toxic waste into the used oil/gas wells, which most are kilometers underground, instead of the shallow graves or the ocean floors which the waste currently goes to.
    The talk about global warming only mentions the greenhouse gases from above causing climate change, what about all the oil and gases in the earths core, would this not act like as natural coolant for the earth's core( the same principal as oil used in an electrical transformer and gases in a refrigerator "TO KEEP IT COOL").
    Oil and gas were formed by toxic waste in the FIRST place, No!? (or is it fusion of different matter over time from extreme pressures, heat/cold (pressures on an atom/s can create extreme heat or cold "frequency waves" depending on the matter used/produced, E=M, or M=E and then we call it "oil/gas")
    And further to trouble the scientists on the planet who have honestly not done the "math".What happens to the void/s in the ground where the oil/gas (mineral/s) once lay?
    Any person with hydraulic knowledge, knows that fluid (oil) is virtually incompressible and directs pressure evenly in all directions when put under force, so what now is holding all the area/mass/weight of the earth's crust above each and every dry oil well (and underground mining)from eventually collapsing in?
    Hydrauliucs will aslo tell you friction creates heat and will always take the easiest path and all the molten lava is a "fluid" and will soon have to fill some void (oil and gas wells) as this will build up to even out as the earth's core will get hotter, don't think the earth's oceans and the seas will help, what happens to water when it gets hot, steams up (gas)...! That is why we as a planet could pump all the toxic waste into the used wells and if history is correct, this waste will eventually revert to oil over time you could also say the same for all emissions.Capture and extreme compression to produce...? If you can fast track the process to produce diamonds, you can fast track the process to produce oil/minerals etc.
    By doing this you not only filling to the earth back up, it will also help cool the inner core (have to pump ("gas") up and give an "oil" change).
    This not only applies to the oil and gases, but to all the minerals (density) taken from the earth,
    We all take, but what do we replace the mass/density with what originally held everything in place, before human beings started going "berserk/greedy" with the earth's resources?All being's body's on this planet counter-react the opposing forces placed upon it (by using diverse resources/energy's) to stay in it's safe living/temperature range?The current earth was built on the destruction/death, which also originally built the universe/infinteverse)I am sorry to be rambling on, but I have alot to talk about on this subject and other subjects (in all fields) if anyone is willing to truly listen.This has to happen to help all and the planet/s progress. All of human/mankind has been told too many lies, created from one's true thoughts!Even after the very first "ones" (human beings), they CREATED their thoughts/truths from lies, because of the lack of true understanding, now "all" believe.All it has brought is death and destruction to keep everyone from truly knowing and understanding (just take a look at history, it's all because someone gets greedy, or plainly wants extremely more than anyone else, POWER).Humans still haven't gotten the simple basic facts about creation, life and progression/evolution/destruction.IT JUST TAKES "ONE" (of anything) TO START DOING! It is now the time to start working smart and not hard, we have enough humans on this planet in all fields of expertise (willing participants and those eager to learn) to get together and ease the workload on each and everyone.The experts "know" what drives the markets/money up? But they forget, who truly DOES the WORK to drive those markets/money, PEOPLE ENERGY = MASS (of PEOPLE), there's that equation again E=M(c2 or people squared).You can have happy energy or extreme energy, but I guess that's up to the masses?And to those who know and understand the "true maths", will know what happened before, during and after (matter, expelled in each and every direction evenly and endlessly) when it would have been all truly first thought?So it is up to ALL of us to control that, "Continuous big bang", we do have the capabilities when truly applied correctly.I have alot of compassion and can see the potential for all matter.
    THE OPPORTUNITIES ARE ENDLESS IF AND NOT WHEN CORRECT ACTIONS ARE TAKEN TO PROGRESS HUMAN/MANKIND!
    Regards,Marino Mangone
  • I thought part one was dead-on, and I also agree completely that connecting your donors and supporters to the beneficiaries is a great way to go. Kiva is the first example that comes to mind, and our nonprofit, Samasource, is currently implementing a similar strategy.

    However, I would argue that this model, while being a game-changing innovation for social enterprises, does not really change the structure of the three-party market. The nonprofit still acts as the intermediary and hosts all interaction across parties, as it should. The difference is that the nonprofit is doing its job with an unprecedented level of transparency, which allows the donors to be fully aware of the impact that they have. You might say that while the nonprofit is still technically the bottleneck, they've managed to make it wider and lube it up quite a bit.

    I actually think it's good that the model retains its traditional structure. Since these changes do not have to be a organizational overhaul, non-profits may be able to implement these sorts of changes on an internal level. The hope is that it's possible for any non-profit to become more effective by keeping these ideas in mind.
blog comments powered by Disqus

  • Copyright SocialEarth, Inc. 2009