704 24 26018 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c8fe44c01504da404202b0b19f0b5947.pdf f1a26773cfdf3c919fab78545be594d5 PDF Text Text A Proposal by Volunteer Centers of Michigan to the Michigan Community Service Commission to Fulfill the Intent of the 2005 Michigan’s Volunteer Investment Grant History and Need Since 1998, the Michigan’s Volunteer Investment Grant (VIG) has been funded by the Michigan legislature for the purpose of increasing capacity and permanence of Michigan’s community volunteer resource centers. By emphasizing the importance of building an endowment as a vehicle to diversify income streams and grow sustainability, the VIG added stability to the fund development plans of more than 20 Volunteer Centers. While increasing the financial capacity of some centers, it is not clear how effective the grant was in building the capacity of Volunteer Centers as a network to meet community needs through staffing, training, communication and programming. Nor is it clear that stronger outcomes and accountability have resulted. In the past three years, especially, Volunteer Centers and other nonprofits that rely on volunteers to assist in meeting their goals, have been hard hit by economic shortfalls. They compete for ever-decreasing funding and higher premium volunteers place on their time, and express concerns that the nonprofit infrastructure needs these resources to survive. Recent studies by the Urban Institute and the Grantmakers Forum support this assessment. And it becomes further apparent, as Volunteer Centers try to educate the public, including public officials, about the need for volunteerism in communities, and the value of civic engagement in dollars and productivity, that the case is not being made effectively. Community service continues to be extremely necessary, yet equally underrated. Support organizations are wont to demonstrate the value of their work and the need to make the case for increased commitment and funding. The Volunteer Centers of Michigan (VCM) seeks $200,000 in VIG funding to: 1. Enlarge the capacity of Volunteer Centers to meet the core competencies and Standards of Excellence mandated by the Volunteer Center National Network. 2. Create an information and referral system statewide that will meet the needs of local centers while providing impact data to help make the case for service and volunteerism in Michigan. 3. Fortify the sector by assisting Volunteer Centers in their role of providing support to local nonprofits. Proposal Overview Volunteer Centers of Michigan proposes that the Michigan’s Volunteer Investment Grant be used in 2005 as a demonstration grant, through which VCM will: 1. Enlarge the capacity of Volunteer Centers to meet the core competencies and Standards of Excellence mandated by the Volunteer Center National Network. These competencies are: I. Connect People with Opportunities to Serve �    The Volunteer Center provides information and services to all potential volunteers in the service area. The Volunteer Center connects people to a variety of opportunities in various sectors of the community. Information available from the Center is accurate and updated at least annually. The Volunteer Center knows how many people they connect with an opportunity to serve and shares this information with the National Network annually. II. Build the Capacity for Effective Local Volunteering  The Volunteer Center provides information about the availability of volunteer management training, consultation and other management resources. III. Promote Volunteering  The Volunteer Center engages in activities to promote the value of volunteering and to recruit volunteers.  The Volunteer Center engages in activities to recognize volunteers. IV. Participate in Strategic Initiatives  The Volunteer Center seeks collaborative opportunities to involve volunteers in addressing community issues. These core competencies will be used as a foundation for the work of the research project mentioned below. The findings of the research project will provide us with the status of the Volunteer Center field in Michigan and allow us to formulate plans to addresses any needs identified by the research. 2. Create an information system that will include the Inauguration of a research project to determine a. A profile of the 30 VCM member Volunteer Centers in Michigan, b. Common outputs and outcomes, c. Challenges faced in meeting community needs and funding programs, d. The social capital of the programs and services performed by Volunteer Centers for the nonprofit and public sectors, further translated into monetary terms; 3. Improve the outreach and recruitment efforts of Volunteer Centers by enhancing their accessibility through increased technological capacity. We will accomplish this via a web-based outreach and recruitment program. Our intent is to contract for a product that will permit our volunteer centers to offer the following: a volunteer matching, referral, and notification system, which provides agencies and volunteers with an easily accessible “one-stop-shop” for posting and responding to traditional and targeted volunteer opportunities. We are currently reviewing a proposal from the POLF on their 1-800 Volunteer products. 4. Strengthen the knowledge base within Volunteer Centers in areas that will elevate sustainability, including: a. Benchmarks, outcomes and accountability b. Resource development 5. Further build the statewide network by identifying and constructing an electronic system of aggregating data and utilizing this information to promote a strong case statement. In an effort �to achieve this we propose to use results from the research data mentioned above to design our system. Tentative plans are to have this in place by September 2005 for implementation by the Volunteer Centers. Even though this is not part of the research project mentioned above, results from the research will assist us in our design efforts. 6. Fortify the nonprofit sector by assisting Volunteer Centers to offer volunteer management training and support, and to involve community nonprofits and public programs in other training activities that will increase recruitment, retention and recognition of their volunteers. Proposed Activities 1. VCM will offer training at its March Retreat, and May and August 2005 quarterly meetings in Logic Model development of benchmark activities and outcomes, resource development, and methods of working with the research protocol utilized within the grant focus. 2. Engage a research firm familiar with statewide nonprofit and volunteer issues to profile the status of Michigan’s Volunteer Centers and network and to evaluate and analyze data over an eighteen month period. 3. Conduct a feasibility study and contract for a national online community searchable database for all Volunteer Centers for three years to increase recruitment of volunteers, make the Volunteer Centers more accessible and visible, and improve data gathering and reporting. 4. Set up a statewide aggregating system to gather data and project analysis that can be used for education and marketing, in order to build case statements that will convey the value of community volunteerism and Volunteer Centers. 5. Issue small re-grants to Volunteer Centers that train local nonprofits in volunteer management and use of the online recruitment service, especially when youth mentoring or volunteering is a target service. �Anticipated Budget 1 Activity Timeline Training for VC March 2005- Retreat Training and technical assistance provided by or brokered through VCM to aid volunteer centers in their local capacity building efforts. Training will include board development, fundraising, volunteer management, outcomes based management, and other forms of nonprofit capacity building. Est. Cost $5,500 -Staff time including Director and Associate Director - Two national training providers 2 3 4 5 VCM Network Meeting May 2005- Quarterly Mtg. $850 Meetings will be used to garner information from centers for the research project, give feedback on the surveys, and make any modifications to the system deemed necessary. VCM meetings at $850/meeting (typical costs of gatherings with meeting rooms, some travel and snacks) VCM Network Meeting August 2005- Quarterly Mgt. $850 Meetings will be used to garner information from centers for the research project, give feedback on the surveys, and make any modifications to the system deemed necessary. VCM meetings at $850/meeting (typical costs of gatherings with meeting rooms, some travel and snacks) Research May 2005 – November 2006 $90,000 Two phases of research to determine the baseline of services and value offered by Centers, and determine common impact and goals of centers in various communities. Bid from Kahle Research ($45,000 each phase with reports) Online Community Searchable Database August 2005 – July 2008 $64,000 Web-based system to provide recruitment, placement, and tracking information to centers and the volunteers and nonprofits they serve. The service provider(s) will be determined on a competitive basis. The $64,000 will be for initial set up, one year’s hosting, and one year’s operation.(based on a bid from the Points of Light Foundation) Statewide Aggregating System September 2005 – September 2006 $2,500 Information from the survey and web-based database will be published to establish and share the value of volunteer centers and their work. Publication costs (500 pieces) and assembly and publication of information for the web. Re-grants Sept 2005 – September 2006 36,300 VCM and local volunteer centers will be provided grants to aid in the implementation of the various systems and technical assistance mechanisms of the program. Grant sizes will range from $500 to $1,000 depending on size and need. Total $200,000 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_VCM_Proposal-to-MCSC-Draft Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Association Volunteer Centers of Michigan proposal to MCSC draft Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Association. Volunteer Centers of Michigan Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Association Volunteer Centers of Michigan proposal to MCSC draft. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MCSC) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Volunteer Centers of Michigan Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49420 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/42618f97a5a5914517073bc34d0e8ac3.pdf 6febbad8fa58bf8fed3dc59d26e6c10c PDF Text Text September 12, 1988 SUBJECT: First Meeting of the Statewide Nonprofit Organization Leadeus, August 31, 1988 The first meeting of the statewide nonprofit organization leaders was held at WKKF on August 31, 1988, from 10 a.m. through lunch. Ten leading nonprofit organizations in the state of Michigan were represented. The participants and a brief description of the organization follows: Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan v (AICUM) -- represented by Richard Marburger, Chairman of the Board, and Edward Blews, Jr., President. A membership association of Michigan's private colleges and universities-- chief function is advocacy. Council of Michigan Foundations (CMF) -- represented by John E. Marshall, III, Chairman of the Board, and Dorothy Johnson, President. A membership association of Michigans' foundations and corporate giving programs -- chief functions are technical assistance and advocacy. Michigan Association of School Administrators (MASA) -represented by James Doyle, President of the Board, and Donald Elliott, Executive Director. A membership organization composed of school superintendents of central office administrators chief functions are technical assistance and advocacy. Michigan Association of School Boards (MASB) -- represented by Mary Jason, President of the Board, and Justin King, Executive Director. A membership organization including every school district in Michigan -- chief functions are inservice training, conferences, and superintendent searches. Michigan Health Council (MHC) -- represented by Terence Davies, M.D., Chairman of the Board, and James Tarrant, Executive Director. Chief functions are to serve as a convenor and facilitator, to support health promotion efforts, and advocacy. Michigan Community College Association (MCCA) -- represented by Thomas M. Bernthal, Executive Director, (Richard Calkins, President of the Board, had planned to attend but was detained by an emergency) -- chief functions are inservice training and advocacy. Michigan Council for the Arts (MCA) -- represented by Kathryn Martin (a board member designated as the surrogate for Leon S. Cohan, Chairman of the Board), and Barbara "Bunny" Goldman, ~ v �Executive Director -- chief functions are support for artists and promotion of the arts. Michigan League for Human Services (MLHS) -- represented by Ernest C. Browne, Jr., Chairman of the Board, and Beverley ~ McDonald, Executive Director -- chief functions are research, advocacy, and administration of the Michigan Emergency Cash Flow Loan Fund for nonprofit organizations. Presidents Council of State Universities of Michigan (PCSUM) -represented by Arend "Don" Lubbers, Chairman of the Board, and Glenn Stevens, Executive Director -- chief functions are a convening and self-regulating role among state universities. United Way of Michigan (UWM) -- represented by Fulton B. Eaglin, Chairman of the Board, and Howard L. Shapiro, Executive Director --chief function is to serve as the coordinator for the state's 106 autonomous local United Ways. The meeting was convened in the Kellogg Room by Russell G. Mawby, who explained that WKKF had decided to convene the meeting because it seemed that Michigan's nonprofit sector faced common challenges and opportunities. In terms of challenges, all nonprofits are concerned with challenges to the tax-deductibility of contributions, contemplated changes in the Unrelated Business Income Tax, reductions in federal support, and the elimination of the nonitemizer deduction. In terms of opportunities, there seemed to be great potential for mutually beneficial actions through cooperation, which had never been tried before in Michigan. Dr. Mawby then sketched out seven areas of mutual interest for all nonprofits: Education (general, preservice, inservice); Increasing philanthropy (expanding the philanthropic "pie"); Legislative/Regulatory arena (promoting positive legislation and r egulation); Research (expanding the frontiers of knowledge in theory and in practice); Recognition of the nonprofit sector (assuring that donors, volunteers, and professionals receive due credit and praise); Economic impact of nonprofit organizations (to demonstrate how many jobs and how much economic activity is directly traceable to this sector); and Media (to proaote poaitift coverage and aftrt aaaetiw coverage). v v/ �In the discussion that followed, Dr. Mawby asked the assembled leaders to add to, subtract from, disagree, or agree with the list. The viewpoints of the leaders showed a great diversity of opinion. Stevens and Blews felt that the basic concern for NPOs lay in legislative and regulatory initiatives. Eaglin, on the other hand, saw the "shrinking pie" to be the paramount issue. Davies felt that education was most important. Elliott's main concern was to raise public awareness of the nonprofit sector. Marburger commented that it was important to discover a "single concept" to recommend to funders. Shapiro felt that the real issue was competition between the nonprofits which is counterproductive and wastes much time, money, and effort. Given the discussion, it seems sensible to say that "reducing competition" should become number eight on the list. Blews suggested another addition, that of voluntary leadership. Martin agreed that this is important, but McDonald believed that it could lead to a tendency to forget the importance of volunteers who do essential but unglamorous tasks. Accordingly, "voluntary leadership" should be added to the list as number nine. The meeting then adjourned for lunch. The group divided into three subgroups led respectively by Lubbers, Shapiro, and Johnson. A list of people at each of the three tables is appended. Each group was charged to consider the questions of whether this meeting was useful, whether it would be desirable to meet again, whether any other group should be invited, and if so, to name the group/groups. The three leaders reported as follows at the end of lunch: Table 1 (Lubbers) -- The meeting has been very useful. Only the CEOs should meet again in Lansing to set goals for future cooperation. CMF's Improving Philanthropy effort could provide staff work for this effort. Other groups could and should be invited but not until this effort becomes more mature. Table 2 (Shapiro) -- This has been a useful meeting which could be the first step toward a statewide nonprofit organization council. There should be another meeting like this one (that is, with both board and CEO involvement) in Lansing, and Stevens volunteered the facilities of PCSUM as the venue. It is probably premature to add other organizations at this time but eventually religion must be included. Table 3 (Johnson) -- The meeting has been useful possibly as the f irst step towards a Michigan Nonprofit Coalition (not a formal organization, but a coalition of organizations). WKKF should convene a meeting of the CEOs only in Lansing. The group should not be expanded at this time, but ultimately more health r epresentation and youth-serving groups will need to be included. It was decided that the organization would stay the same size for now, that there would be a meeting of CEOs only at PCSUM offices in Lansing in early autumn. The meeting concluded with a group portrait. �Subsequently, the meeting of the Executive Directors was set for October 17, 1988, at the PCSUM offices in Lansing. Peter R. Ellis and Joe l J. Orosz will represent WKKF. 0947N/wpc6 �Table Assignments August 31, 1988 ..._, Table 1 Lubbers Maw by Eaglin Doyle Jason Tarrant McDonald Patterson Table 2 Shapiro Orosz Marburger Marshall King Stevens Goldman Table 3 Johnson Ellis Blews Elliot Davies Bernt hal Browne Martin � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1988-08-31_First-Meeting-of-the-Statewide-Nonprofit-Organization Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1988-08-31 First Meeting of the Statewide Nonprofit Organization Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1988-08-31 First Meeting of the Statewide Nonprofit Organization. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988-08-31 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/d69ceab249ba4a5f81e5cb8576c671cc.pdf 5aa71e2fae8dceb0fb529926f7244668 PDF Text Text Second Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum October 17, 1988 Pete Ellis opened the meeting by conveying Russ Mawby's greetings, and thanking Glenn Stevens for serving as the group's host. The executive directors of nine of the ten organizations were able to attend. The exception was Justin King of the Michigan Association of School Boards, who was represented by his deputy, Sam Sniderman. In addition to the above-named, participants included Linda Patterson, Council of Michigan Foundations, and Joel Orosz, W. K. Kellogg Foundation. The group quickly came to consensus that they wished to continue meeting in order to share issues and concerns, but had no desire to establish a formal organization of any type. They also agreed that one of the most immediate and pressing challenges faced by all Michigan Nonprofits is in the arena of legislative and regulatory concerns. Specifically, the leading concerns are: 1. 2. 3. The Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT) Tax-deductibility of contributions Directors', officers', and volunteers' liability Pete then asked Howard Shapiro to share his concept paper with the group. This statement recognized that nonprofit organizations in Michigan face many common concerns, including legislative and regulatory challenges; education; increasing philanthropy; research; recognition of the sector; economic impact of nonprofit organizations; and media aarke~ing activitie~ The paper describes a "Michigan Nonprofit Forum," which "would be a group of nonprofit organizations which would come together for the purpose of discussion, planning and collaboration on issues which affect the nonprofit movement in Michigan.'' Shapiro believed that it should be a "group [which] would serve without an established set of bylaws or structure." The board chair and the chief executive of each participating organization would continue to serve as a committee of the whole, and staffing needs would be met by the organizations working collaboratively. The Shapiro paper was met with approval. The members unanimously endorsed the name "Michigan Nonprofit Forum," and agreed that they should not establish a formal organization but rather an informal network. They did suggest minor editorial changes. Shapiro will revise the concept paper based upon those suggestions, then share this new version with Pete Ellis and Joel Orosz for group distribution. The Committee then agreed that the next legislat ive and regulatory concerns and not-for-profit sector. Since these are it was decided to structure the meeting meeting should focus upon their impact on the common to every organization, so that both the CEOs and the �Chairmen will attend. The meeting is planned for Tuesday, November 29, at the fifth floor Faculty Library at the Thomas M. Cooley School of Law in Lansing. It will be hosted by the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan. The format will include presentations on legislative and regulatory issues nationally, from Bob Smucker, vice president for Government Relat i ons of INDEPENDENT SECTOR. This will be followed by a similar talk f rom a statewide perspective by Richard D. McLellan, a partner in the Lansing office of the Detroit law firm of Dykema & Gosset. After the presentations, there will be time for the participants' discussion on these issues, or any of the steps taken thus far, and to the consideration of future actions. The process will be as follows: Dottie Johnson and Glenn Stevens will co-chair the program committee for November 29, with Johnson taking the lead in securing the national speaker, and Stevens taking responsibility for lining up the statewide speaker. Meeting invit a tions and other logistics will be handled cooperatively among Stevens, Ed Blews, and Joel Orosz. Shapiro will revise the concept paper in light of suggestions received, then submit it to Pete Ellis for group distribution. This concept paper will then be forwarded to all CEOs and chairmen, along with Joel Orosz' summary of the October 17 meeting, and Russ Mawby's invitation to attend the November 29 meeting. Each organization will then review the concept paper individually, and send suggested changes (if any) to WKKF. As a part of this review process, each group will include a suggested prioritization of the issues facing the nonprofits in Michigan. It was decided that the Forum should discipline itself initially to do no more than it can handle effectively. For that reason, the decision was made to concentrate on legislative and regulatory concerns exclusively for the time being. In order to facilitate cooperation, the organizations agreed to exchange all of each others' publications. Finally, the group photograph of the first meeting was distributed to all participants. 0569Y �CONCEPT PAPER MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM BACKGROUND We affirm that nonprofit organizations in Michigan have common interests and goals even though the specific purposes for which they were formed are different. The nonprofit sector is facing challenges and opportunities that require collaboration -- enabling all nonprofits to benefit from a shared relationship and utilizing the best skills and strengths of each organization. There are areas of mutual interest for all nonprofits, including: 1. Promote awareness of the role, diversity, capacity, and impact of the sector. 2. Research; 3. Media and marketing activities; 4. Legislative and regulatory issues and concerns, at both the state and national level; 5. Advocacy; 6. Education and Leadership Development, both volunteer and professional; 7. Increasing philanthropy and encouraging volunteerism; 8. Recognition of the nonprofit sector, especially the economic impact of nonprofit organizations. 9. Program progress and services which strengthen the ability of nonprofit agencies to fulfill us their missions. PURPOSE The Michigan Nonprofit Forum is a network of nonprofit organizations united for the purpose of discussion, planning and collaborative action on issues which affect the nonprofit movement in Michigan. This is achieved through special meetings, conferences and the exchange of material relative to specific topics identified as high priority . �2 ORGANIZATION The Michigan Nonprofit Forum is an informal network, the members of whic h are determined by the initial nonprofit organizations participating in this effort. It serves without an established set of bylaws or formal structure. Staffing needs are met by the nonp r ofit organizations and shift depending on the need or capability being sought. The chief volunteer and executive officer of each organization serve as a committee of the whole with assignments being made to specific groups of persons or to an individual. Meetings are determined on the basis of specific projects and the timeliness required or on an "as needed" basis to be determined by any of the nonprofit organizations. The organizations come together at least quarterly for a planned activ ity or for general sharing of information and ideas. ACTIVITIES The Michigan Nonprofit Forum would become an organization that may build joint activities and programs to meet specific needs iden t ified by the organization's leadership. This may include: 1. Legislative coalitions on issues affecting the nonprofit movement at the state and federal level and which are best served by bringing together nonprofit groups to respond as a united force, on issues such as tax deductions for nonprofits, reductions in federal/state support and unrelated business income tax regulations; 2. Conferences and educational seminars on topics of related interest or for the purpose of training volunteers or professionals in special skill areas or on topics which affect the nonprofit movement; 3. Research projects in order to expand the knowledge in theory and practice of nonprofit organizations as well as to study the impact of nonprofit organizations from the economic, volunteer or service activity level; 4. Marketing and media activities to promote a positive image of nonprofit organizations and offer recognition for outstanding efforts of donors, volunteers, and professionals; 5. Volunteer leadership development to improve skills in individuals to serve as volunteers and board members for nonprofit organizations and to identify persons to serve in this role. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1988-10-17_Second-Meeting-of-the-Michigan-Nonprofit-Forum Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1988-10-17 Second Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1988-10-17 Second Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49402 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988-10-17 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/401b63c0785deb60c6614a80414822e5.pdf fc57cdc94cd584ee35e6911da6248ec5 PDF Text Text Third Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum Lansing, MI November 29, 1988 The Third Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum was held at the Cooley Law School in Lansing on Tuesday, November 29, 1988. The participants in the meeting were as follows: Mr. James R. Tarrant, President, Michigan Health Council; Mr. Richard E. Marburger, Chairman, and Mr. Edward 0. Blews, Jr., President, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan; Mr. Calvin Patterson, III, representing the Chairman; Mrs. Dorothy A. Johnson, President, Council of Michigan Foundations; Mr. Donald Elliott, Executive Director, Michigan Association of School Administrators; Ms. Mary Jason, Immediate Past President; and Mr. Justin King, Executive Director, Michigan Association of School Boards; Ms. Shirley Stock, representing the President and the Executive Director, Michigan Community College Association; Ms. Barbara Goldman, Executive Director, Michigan Council for the Arts; Mr. Ernest C. Browne, Jr., Chairman, Mr. Herb Yamanishi, representing the Executive Director, Michigan League for Human Services; Mr. Arend Lubbers, Chairman and Mr. Glenn Stevens, Executive Director, Presidents Council of State Universities of Michigan; and Mr. Fulton Eaglin, Chairman, and Mr. Howard L. Shapiro, Executive Director, United Way of Michigan. Other participants in the meeting were Ms. Linda Patterson, Council of Michigan Foundations, and Drs. Peter R. Ellis and Joel J. Orosz, W. K. Kellogg Foundation. The meeting was chaired by Dr. Russell G. Mawby, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Dr. Mawby opened the meeting and then introduced Michael Cox, Esq., Dean, Cooley Law School. Dean Cox welcomed the Michigan Nonprofit Forum to the Law School, and then departed. The next order of business was introductions all around. The first item on the agenda was the introduction of the first speaker, Mr. Robert Smucker, Vice President for Governmental Affairs of INDEPENDENT SECTOR (IS) of Washington, DC. Mr. Smucker's remarks are summarized below. Mr. Smucker said that the Michigan Nonprofit Forum was part of the growing movement across the country. Similar activities are underway in Colorado, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York. Smucker began by talking about two terrible defeats that the independent sector had suffered in recent legislative and regulatory activity. In 1981, the charitable deduction for nonitemizers was passed, but sunsetted after five years. In 1986, Congress allowed this �2 legislation to die. This meant that 70 million Americans lost the right to deduct their gifts to charity. In the two years following, it has been found that nonitemizers are very sensitive to tax ~ o licy, and the amount they have given has dropped off dramatically. Also, in 1986 Congress disallowed gifts of appreciated property and instituted an alternative minimum tax. All of these measures have greatly crippled the amount given to charity. Smucker then turned to some victories that IS has won including the withdrawal of the proposed 5 percent excise tax on the profits of private foundations, and the withdrawal by the IRS (something which rarely happens) of new and onerous lobbying regulations. Smucker then went on to consider some legislative and regulatory concerns in detail. The first is the Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT). The purpose of this legislation is to broaden the tax on the income-producing activities of nonprofits. It is sponsored by Representative J. J. Pickel of Austin, Texas. Its impact would be to add additional taxes on such things as catalog and bookstore sales, medical equipment, travel and tourism activities, affinity credit cards, merchandising royalties, and advertising by nonprofit organizations. The problem with this legislation is that you cannot "rif le shot." For instance, it proposes to tax anything sold by museums which are either "functional or decorative." The problem with this is that the Girl Scouts, who are also a nonprofit organization, sell uniforms, which are functional; therefore, they woul d be taxed just as would museums. The question is, how well are nonprofits already reporting their unrelated business income? If they are doing a good job, there is no need for further tax. If they are evading reporting, then a further tax would be necessary. IS supports honest reporting, and has recently requested that the IRS gather better information about the reporting accuracy of nonprofit organizations. The propects for passage are about fifty-fifty. Chances of passage would be greater if the small business community as a whole was excited about it, but that is not so. Most of the complaining comes from some trade organizations. The next concern was regulations governing lobbying. The purpose of these new regulations is to implement the 1976 laws governing lobbying. The IRS came out with the new regulations in 1986. They clarified the 1976 law, but they were absolutely draconian. They raised a storm of protest and the IRS finally withdrew them, something that it rarely does. IS feels that a major modification of those proposed regulations is needed. The revised regulations will be out within two months. The biggest concern is the question of what constitutes lobbying by a nonprofit organization. The key here is the so-called "call to action" issue. IS feels that in order for an appeal to be called lobbying, it must be specific; that is, it must name a particular bill, call upon a particular member of Congress, and suggest a vote, one way or the other. The line between education, whi~h is a legitimate nonprofit function, and lobbying, which is considered an illegitamate nonprofit function, is very fine. One perfectly legal way to get around this problem is �3 for a 50l(C)(3) organization to set up a 50l(C)(4) organization in order to carry on lobbying. The next topic Mr. Smucker addressed was the nonitemizer deduction. Reinstitution of the nonitemizer deduction would allow 70 million non i temizers to deduct charitable contributions from their federal income tax. Such a measure will be introduced in the next session. If passed, it would increase giving, and it would also be fair. IS fee l s that if higher-income Americans have a right to deduct their charitable contributions, so should lower income Americans. This is a s i mple matter of equity. IS's staff and others have been having preliminary discussions with staffers on Capitol Hill in the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee. IS hopes to have a bill available for possible action by late in 1989. Its propects, quite frankly, are limited for the near future. However, one must remember that such a measure is fair, and that it will also increase giving to philanthropy, and in the long run Mr. Smucker feels that it can pass. At this point, Mr. Eaglin asked that since it was a matter of equity, what were the chances that someone would bring a lawsuit to force this equality. Mr. Smucker said he knew of no such activity on the horizon, and felt it would be very difficult to sue the government on this point. The next subject Mr. Smucker addressed was that of tax deductability for gifts of appreciated property. IS is looking for a sponsor for a bill that would drop gifts of appreciated property from the alternative minimum tax. They have found no sponsor as yet. The impact would be to increase giving, especially upon upper-income contributors. Recently, IS staffers and others have visited with the Joint Committee staff (that is the Joint Staff between the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee), in order to attempt to get this bill sponsored. IS supports such a bill, although it has frankly limited prospects in the Congress as it is now made up. Higher education institutions will need to take the lead in order to get this passed. The next subject Mr. Smucker addressed was that of volunteer liability protection legislation. This would have the effect of giving volunteers immunity from civil liability for acts committed in their capacity as volunteers. Senator Melcher (D-Montana) and Congressman Porter (R-Illinois) are the sponsors of this legislation. Its impact would be to encourage volunteering by removing the fear of liability. This bill has many co-sponsors, but little action has been taken on it so far. IS supports it on one condition. In its original incarnation, this bill used a stick approach; that is, it threatened to reduce by one percent federal bloc k grants to any state not enacting similar legislation. IS now supports it because a carrot approach is being used; that is, all states enacting similar legislation will be given a one percent increase in federal block grants. Prospects for this bill are fift y-fifty at best. It should be mentioned that 40 states currently provide varying levels of protection for volunteers, although direct-service volunteers are generally omitted from these statutes. �4 Mr. Smucker then moved on to some predictions about the future. He feels that there will be a tax bill in 1989. That bill will propose a five percent excise tax on nonprofit organizations. He also fears that the same bill will propose a two percent floor for charitable deductions. That is, only those charitable deductions that are above two percent of adjusted gross income will be deductible. He feels that that is a terrible threat to the nonprofit world since the most recent statistics suggest that the average giver contributes about 2.1 percent of his adjusted gross income. Therefore, a two percent floor would effectively abolish charitable deductions for all but the wealthiest givers. Mr. Smucker closed by saying that IS is attempting to get a meeting with President-elect Bush and his senior staffers in order to inform them of the issues and concerns of importance to nonprofit organizations. Dr. Mawby then introduced the second speaker, Stephen Zimmerman of the Lansing office of the Detroit law firm, Dykema and Gossett. Mr. Zimmerman brought with him an associate in his office, Cindy Wilson. Zimmerman's topic was "Public Act 170 and its Proposed Amendments." Public Act 170 took effect on January 1, 1988. It introduced two areas of change in the law with regard to nonprofit organizations. The first was in the area of director liability, the second in the area of corporate indemnification of directors and officers. The backdrop for this law is a growing crisis in the liability arena for nonprofit organizations. A Gallup Poll in 1987 showed that 20 percent of nonprofit organizations in Michigan had directors resign or refuse to serve because of liability concerns. Directors and officers (D&O) insurance is going up rapidly, but anyone who can afford to buy it is increasingly doing so. Public Act 170 was passed to address this situation. Mr. Zimmerman then discussed the limitations on liability protection for directors under Public Act 170. First, it applies only to the act i vities carried on by a person discharging the duties of a director, not to all acts that person may carry on. The person must be a volunteer director, that is he must not be substantially paid for his services. It does not take effect until an amendment to the art i cles of incorporation of the organization is made. For trade associations specifically: • it applies only to suits brought by the association or its members • there is no protection for suits brought by a third party • it does not apply to the officers or the committee members of the trade association, only to the directors • there is no protection for disloyal conduct, bad faith, improper personal benefit, or gross negligence Zimmerman said that there is a special provision of the law meant to apply only to 50l(C)(30 organizations. This provision offers complete protection for volunteer directors from third party suits. In fact, �5 the law was poorly written in this section, for it applies to all acts or omissions, including gross negligence. Zimmerman pointed out, however, that this is a mistake in the law that does not have to be repeated in the organization's bylaws. When the bylaws are amended, the organization can specifically exclude liability from disloyal conduct, bad faith, improper personal benefit, and gross negligence. Zimmerman then addressed a question from Ms. Goldman with regard to the distinction between director liability and corporate indemnification. Ms. Goldman's question was, if the director is not at all liable to suits, why does he have to be indemnified? Zimmerman answered that while the directors are not subject to liability, there may be subject to some expenses to prove that they are not. Therefore, the indemnification clause of the law guarantees that the corporation that they are serving will indemnify them, or cover their expenses, for providing this proof. Zimmerman went on to say that we must remember that exposure does not go away. If the individual director is not liable for an act, the organization which he serves then becomes liable for that act. Therefore, the individual may not have any trouble, but the organization still has the difficulty of fighting that suit. Zimmerman then went on to explain about corporate indemnification. He defined indemnification as payment for expenses that a director has when being sued in his capacity as a director. However, this law applies not only to directors, but also to officers, employees, agen ts, committee members, and trustees. It permits indemnification for any expenses including penalities. It requires the payment of actual and reasonable attorney fees in mandatory indemnification. It permits decision on indemnification by council opinion. It allows for par t ial indemnification, should that be necessary. It permits nonprofit corporations to advance expenses, and allows brother indemnification by contract, by law, or articles than provided by sta t ute. Mr. Zimmerman's next topic was the pending amendments to Public Act 170. The first is senate bill number 747 which amends the nonprofit corporation act relating to limiting the liability of a volunteer director. There are three such limits: • for breach of directors' fiduciary duty arising under nonprofit corporation act or other applicable law • for 50l(C)(3) corporations, acts or omissions of a volunteer director incurred in the good faith performance of the volunteer director's duties • "volunteer director" defined as a director who does not receive anything of more than nominal value from the corporation for serving as a director Senate Bill Number 747. has passed the Senate and is in the House Judiciary Committee at. the moment. �6 Senate Bill Number 849 amends the uniform management of institutional funds act to permit provisions of articles of incorporation relating to limiting the liability of the member of the governing board of an institutional fund. Its language parallels nonprofit corporation act amendments. Mr. Zimmerman then considered a couple of problems pertaining to all the current nonprofit liability legislation. The first problem is that if a corporation picks up all liabilities of an officer or a director without relating it to that officer or director's performance, it could jeopardize the corporation's 50l(C)(3) status. In short, it could become an inurement, a personal benefit for the director. The second problem is an indirect liability problem. What happens, for instance, if a board member injures a pedestrian on the way home from a meeting? Is that board member still covered by liability and indemnification? Mr. Zimmerman closed by raising some issues for trade association executives. The first question is, should the association adopt the changes? Usually, the answer is yes. The second question is, does the association's chief executive officer have sufficient protection? This is a question which will require a professional evaluation from an attorney. The third question is, should all staff be protected by expanded indemnification? The answer to this is probably not. A good rule of thumb is to protect only those who are directly responsible to the board, such as the officers. There may be a partial indemnification of other employees, but it would be unwise to fully indemnify each and every employee. The fourth question is, who are the association's "officers"? This is a question which must be settled by identifying them by name of position very specifically in the bylaws of the organization. Zimmerman feels that Public Act 170 and its amendments offer tremendous benefits for associations. It offers some protection for board members from member suits, it encourages association executives and members to serve on charitable 50l(C)(3) Boards, and it permits broader indemnification which can protect individual officers, directors, and executives. The bad news, however, is that it may not affect insurance rates for directors and · officers liability. On the surface, it would seem to be likely to drive these rates down, but we will have to wait until the whole appeals process is played out and then until insurance companies can see what practical difference that the law makes in their payments. There is, after all, no change in the underlying risks which apply to the business of nonprofit organizations. In response to a question, Mr. Zimmerman acknowledged that there is a proposal before the Michigan House to provide full immunity for volunteers from tort liability. He feels that it will probably die during this session. A group discussion then followed in which Howard Shapiro pointed out that the whole question UBIT is part of the larger question of profit versus nonprofit competition. Shapiro pointed out that state government (public nonprofits) are one of the biggest culprits, �7 especially in the field of printing. He suggested that perhaps a subcommittee of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum could meet with small business leaders and with representative Debbie Stabenow, the chairman of the small business subcommittee of the House. Shapiro also pointed out that there is no statewide charitable deduction at the state level. He said that we desperately need one. Shapiro feels that these two things, taken together, could help to reduce conflicts between nonprofit and for-profit organizations. Herb Yamanishi responded that he feels that many of these conflicts can be traced to the underlying issue of how best to finance government. Glenn Stevens pointed out that the President's Council of State Universities of Michigan has already established links to small business associations and to Debbie Stabenow. Stevens pointed out that the President's Council will be happy to work together with any of the other Michigan nonprofit forum organizations to strengthen and expand those links and that dialogue. Dr. Mawby then raised the issue of next steps. He announced to the Forum that the Kellogg Foundation would be bowing out of future direct participation. He said that the Foundation had been delighted to serve as the fair broker to call this group together, but since the group had decided to continue meeting and was gaining momentum in doing so, the Kellogg Foundation would now step back. The Foundation would continue to be represented at the table by the Council of Michigan Foundations, and would be happy to be helpful in the future directly if some staff members had expertise which the Forum wished to call upon. Dr. Mawby suggested that a rotating steering committee be formed to insure that next meeting would indeed be held. Fulton Eaglin, and Howard Shapiro announced their intention to host the next meeting. Glenn Stevens then volunteered to serve on the steering committee. Arend (Don) Lubbers said that he felt that taking a turn on the steering committee from time to time should be built into the job descriptions of each executive in the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Thereupon, Ed Blews also volunteered to serve on the steering committee. Fulton Eaglin then took the floor and announced that he was concerned that the vision of the group was becoming too limited; reduced to just getting the job done. He feels that the Forum could serve a far more important function of networking and building alliances for change. In order to grow, he felt that it was important to lure truly important speakers to the group. Lubbers agreed, and mentioned the experience of the City Club of Cleveland, which consistently attracts national leaders to speak to its gatherings. Eaglin pointed out that Governor Blanchard might accept an invitation, as might former President Ford. Robert Teeter, a top aide to President-elect Bush, is a client of Mr. Eaglin's law firm, and could be brought in. Through him, it might be possible to even get President Bush to speak. Eaglin felt that it was tremendously important for the Forum to continue to get good speakers as the glue to hold it together. Lubbers responded that he felt that that was a true forum. Dr. Peter Ellis announced that the first meeting of the Michigan Grantmakers and Grantseekers would be held on May 2, 1989, and perhaps could provide a prototype for such meetings. �8 Mr. Eaglin then suggested that the goal for the next meeting would be to get Governor Blanchard to be the speaker. He felt that the entire group, that is the directors, volunteers, and the executives should be in on this, and perhaps a broader group of nonprofit organizations as well. Dr. Ellis then suggested that each organization concentrate on pub licizing the Forum more widely in their own publications. Ms. Goldman then pointed out that the steering committee should have numbers from three different sectors on it, that it should not be all education, or all health, or all the arts, or all human services. Goldman also pointed out that the group as constituted left out a lar ge subsector of the independent sector, that is, the churches. Dr . Mawby then summed up the decisions that were taken. The next meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum will consist of all of the executive directors, who will serve as a steering committee of the whole for the time being. At that meeting, important decisions should be made, especially about the future direction of the Forum, and then the steering committee could be reduced to three -- one each from a different sector. It would also be understood that the steering committee membership would rotate from time to time. The next meeting of the full group would be a forum with the Governor speaking, and it would be held in Lansing. It was left to the 10 executive directors, at their next meeting, to iron out the details of this broad outline. The meeting was then adjourned for lunch. 1052N ipc � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1988-11-29_Third-Meeting-of-the-Michigan-Nonprofit-Forum Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1988-11-29 Third Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1988-11-29 Third Meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49403 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1988-11-29 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/5e2827bc59c42477af239db56fb81ef7.pdf e57b85c583aae948bbeea49b228ad8eb PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM Meeting of January 23, 1989 Lansing, Mich1gan The meeting of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum was held at the Cooley Law School in Lansing on Monday, January 23, 1989. The participants in the meeting were as follows: Thomas M. Bernthal, Executive Director, Michigan Community Col lege Association; Edward 0. Blews, Jr., President, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan; Donald Elliott, Executive Director, Michigan Association of School Administrators; Barbara Goldman, Executive Director, Michigan Council for the Arts; Justin King, Executive Director, Michigan Association of School Administrators; Beverley McDonald, Executive Director, Michigan League for Human Services; Linda Patterson, representing Dorothy A Johnson, President, Council of Michigan Foundations; Glenn Stevens. Executive Director, Presidents Council of State Universities of Michigan; James R. Tarrant, President, Michigan Health Council; and, Howard L. Shapiro, President, United Way of Michigan. Mr. Shapiro .opened the meeting with a review of the minutes of the November 29, 1988 meeting. It was suggested that future minutes need not be as detailed and only provide a summary and action items. There was brief discussion of the role of Kellogg Foundation and the need for their participation and support. It was pointed out that Dr. Mawby had requested to be kept informed and aware of the activities of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. It was also recognized that the Forum may need to turn to Kellogg Foundation for special proJects. The agenda and discussion centered on the planning for the luncheon meeting at which Governor James Blanchard would be asked to speak to a wide spectrum of nonprofit organizations. It would be important to demonstrate for the Governor the size of the nonprofit movement and their need to hear from public officials regarding the nonprofit movement. The focus of the Forum luncheon would be to highlight the goals of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum and the State's interest in this through: - promoting voluntarism - encouraging service to the community -state policy for nonprofit sector - role of the nonprofit organization - relationship of nonprofits to the concept of public/private sector partnership. �Page 2- Michigan Nonprofit Forum Meeting of January 23, 1989 The Forum luncheon and meeting would have a two-pronged strategy. In addition to trying to establish the most favorable climate for the nonprofit sector to operate, we want to establish the methods to improve the quality of life for the community and the state. The Forum luncheon would also be an opportunity for all the people who come to meet to generate the agenda --- through working sessions --- for the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. This would be the mechanism for identifying issues of significance, policies that need our attention and the comn1on elements that need our attention. In preparation for securing the Governor / s participation, we need to provide the Governor with information and facts regarding the rich diversity of the nonprofit sector. Also, each of us could talk about our constituencies and its representatives. It was also important to begin talking to the policy people in the Governor / s office so that they would be familiar with our efforts. It was also felt that this should be a targeted invitation list which will focus on key volunteer leadership. A date for the Forum was the Fal 1 of 1989 but a specific date will await a report from each of the organizations regarding their calendars. A subgroup was formed to work out the specific details of the Forum and includes: Edward Blews, Glenn Stevens, Beverley McDonald, Justin King and Howard Shapiro. This subgroup will meet on February 23, 1989 and report to the ful 1 committee of Chief Executive Officers at the meeting on February 27, 1989. The meeting was then adjourned for lunch. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1989-01-23_Meeting-Summary Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989-01-23 meeting summary Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989-01-23 meeting summary. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49404 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-01-23 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4db9119d977b675d5bd2e96d91ab574b.pdf 47c2f31f65440f43d1a62e37a99a85c8 PDF Text Text TO: R. Mawby D. Johnson^ J. Orosz ' L. Patterson FROM: P. Ellis W. K. KELLOGG FOUNDATION Memorandum April 4, 1989 RE: Meeting of Michigan Nonprofit Forum (MNF) on March 28. 1989. and report on proposed MNF luncheon and meeting for Fal! of 1989 On March 28, 1989, MNF representatives met and discussed the attached paper. In attendance were Donald Elliott, Michigan Association of School Administrators; Barbara Goldman, Michigan Council for the Arts; Justin King, Michigan Association of School Boards; Glenn Stevens, Council of State College Presidents; Pete Ellis, Council of Michigan Foundations; Herb Yamanishi, representing the Michigan League for Human Services; and Howard Shapiro, United Way of Michigan. There was unanimous feeling that MNF continuation was important and that the late Fall conference by held. Some additional comments are as follows: 1. The conference would run from 10-2:15 p.m. on one of the following dates: November 16, 17, 28, or December 11, 12 (November 16 is a WKKF board date). The Kellogg Center or Radisson Hotel, Lansing would be the probable sites. 2. Governor Blanchard would be invited to be the speaker and RGM would be approached to offer the invitation. 3. The conference format would be as follows: 10:00 a.m. — Opening Session (DJ would preside) 10:30 a.m. — Workshops 12:00 p.m. — Lunch 1:30 p.m. — Discussion (open forum re MNF's future 2:15 p.m. — Adjournment 4. Special invitations would be tended to state minority and youth organizations to participate in the Forum and the program. 5. Some of the workshops' topics might be: a. b. Promoting the nonprofit sector Increase and improve philanthropy c. Youth, our most precious resource d. e. f. Economic impact of the nonprofit sector Promote leadership development Tax ... regulatory and legal issues �6. WKKF will be approached for funding of a part-time staff person to handle conference logistics. United Way of Michigan offered to be the facilitator. It was pointed out that WKKF will expect other organizations to share the cost of this event if WKKF is asked to support it. No indication was given regarding WKKF assistance. Pleased to discuss further as you deem appropriate. 569H Attachment � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1989-04-04_MNF-Meeting-Memo Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989-04-04 meeting memo Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989-04-04 meeting memo. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49405 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-04-04 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/950204970fe7f8a497e2b8946e980060.pdf 8db19d83a72c5de5794a61a65e6dd372 PDF Text Text MEMORANDUM DATE: September 18, 1989 TO: Michigan Nonprofit Forum Founding Members FROM: Dorothy A. Johnson, President, Council of Michigan Foundations (CMF) RE: Michigan Nonprofit Forum Committee Meeting Notes, August 28, 1989 The meeting was convened for the purpose of reviewing the Forum's present position, in light of Howard Shapiro's departure for New Jersey; and making some decisions on whether, or how, to move forward with this effort. The meeting was initiated by Ed Eagan and Dorothy Johnson. The following persons were in attendance: Edward Blews, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan; Dorothy Johnson, CMF; Donald Elliott, Michigan Association of School Boards; James Tarrant, Michigan Health Council; Beverley McDonald, Michigan League for Human Services; Edward Eagan, United Way of Michigan; Justin King, Michigan Association of School Boards; Peter Ellis, W. K. Kellogg Foundation; and Linda Patterson, CMF. Committee members reported on recent activities including preliminary thoughts for a November Conference; an invitation extended to Dr. Ellis to attend September meeting of nonprofit associations throughout the United States; and the continued need to develop the Michigan Association. Beverley McDonald, representing the Michigan League for Human Services, and Peter Ellis, will both attend the September meeting of the group in hopes of learning more about how the Michigan Nonprofit Forum might be organized to take advantage of our unique qualities and needs ... research, . .dia relations, legislation, and advocacy. Consensus was reached on the following points: 1. The effort to form a statewide group to -represent the mutual interests of Michigan nonprofit organizations should be continued. The original group of 10 initiating organizations should continue to work together to develop an operating structure and philosophical basis for that group using the "Michigan Nonprofit Forum Concept Paper" as the guiding outline. 2. Plans for a November Conference should be postponed until further organizational development is accomplished. 3. Beverley McDonald and Peter Ellis would attend the September Nonprofit Association Conference and share information with the group. 4. Peter Ellis volunteered to draft a Case Statement for the group which will incorporate the ideas of the concept paper with an operating structure. The Case Statement would respect the uniqueness of �2 Michigan; and the group recognizes that its leadership will come from Forum leaders -- not the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, which is only offering to facilitate a developmental process which might be helpful. 5. Beverley McDonald was asked to draft a characterization describing how the Michigan nonprofit climate is unique from other states. 6. All current members were asked to develop a list of prospective members which might help the forum to accurately represent the state's nonprofit sector. 7. A NEXT MEETING DATE of Monday, October 30, 1989, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon in Lansing, was set with the following agenda in mind: a. A report from Beverley McDonald and Peter Ellis about the nonprofit organizations' meeting which they will be attending in San Francisco September 21-23, 1989. b. Review of the draft Case Statement. c. Discussion of a membership-expansion luncheon which might include a keynote speaker (Jon Pratt from Minnesota) and development workshop sessions to identify pertinent mutual concerns. d. Discussion of an annual nonprofit conference which would include the volunteer leadership of statewide organizations, and present opportunities for networking and issue discussion. The group thanked Peter Ellis for his leadership at this crucial juncture and volunteered to be of individual assistance as needed. He will notify the Forum staff members of the next meeting. LBP/jmc:267I 575H:31 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1989-09-18_MNF-Meeting-Memo Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989-09-18 meeting memo Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989-09-18 meeting memo. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49406 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-09-18 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/e080204891160cd2c280ae41ae323ea8.pdf a51e8a842df9883636b7190f05354dba PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM PROPOSED LUNCHEON AND MEETING If.~ 17 ·..:~ p Posstble Dates: November ~or~. 1989 or December 11 or 12, 1989 Possible Locations: Lansing Center Kellogg Center Radisson Hotel Invitees: Current partic i pants in Michigan Nonprofit Forum - each would receive 25 invitations for their constituents Additional organizations who would receive 10-25 invitations tor their constituents include: Michigan Hospital Association Michigan Community Action Agenc1es Michigan Nonprofit Homes Association Michigan Ecumenical Forum <previously the Michigan Council of Churches) Michigan Federation of Private Child & Fami I y Agencies Michigan Association of Children / s AI liance Michigan Area Agencies on Aging Association Others to be considered: American Cancer Society/Michigan Chapter American Lung Association/Michigan Chapter American Heart Association of Michigan Meeting Format: 12:00pm- 1:30pm- Luncheon and Speaker Luncheon Speaker - Governor Blanchard Governor ·· s message: Vo I un tar 1sm and pub I i c/pr l va te partnersh i ps with the private nonprofit sector. ( r'III' �Page 2 - Michigan Nonprofit Forum- Luncheon Meeting Meeting Format <Continued): 1:30pm- 3:00pm- Input from invited participants on the issues confronting the nonprofit movement and support for the concept of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. 1. Is there a role foL a statewide forum of nonprofit organizations? 2. What should the forum address - what issues? 3. Is there a need for networking between diverse nonprofit organizations? 4. Are the organizations present willing to make a comm1tment to such an effort? Material to be developed and distributed prior to the forum luncheon: o Invitations o Brochure describing the Michigan Nonprofit Forum o Explanation of purpose of luncheon meeting o What questions wit 1 be addressed at the Forum luncheon Conference coordination and staff support: United Way of Michigan has agreed to provide coordination for this event. Additional staff support wil I be needed to develop materials, handle mailings. follow-up and luncheon and meeting arrangements. Recommendation to approach Kellogg Foundation to cover cost of staff person for 6-8 months. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_MG_1989_Proposed-Luncheon-and-Meeting Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989 proposed luncheon and meeting Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1989 proposed luncheon and meeting. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49407 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/eb70b85a83fe4e240bfa934231acaa24.pdf c64208ccd8524bff0d20dbfb8253aa21 PDF Text Text COUNCIL OF MICHIGAN FOUNDATIONS Michigan Nonprofit Forum 903 E. Michigan Ave. Albion MI 49224 (517) 629-5040 February 22, 1990 MEMORANDUM 10: Thomas M. Bernthal Edward J. Eagen Barbara Goldman Dorothy Johnson Beverley L. McDonald James Tarrant Edward 0. Slews Don Elliott Robert Ivory Justin King Glenn Stevens FROM: MaryellenJ. Lewis SUBJECT: Draft Proposal Here are three rough pieces of the proposal to implement the Michigan Nonprofit Forum (MNF). I continue to work on the narrative, but I need your input on these pages as soon as possible by phone. I will call each of you early next week to get your comments. By then you should also receive the completed draft, but these pages address the heart of the proposal: (1) The third revised Summary/Mission Statement. (2) The first Workplan draft (without timeline). (3) The first best-guess budget. Give me your best advice. I will work over the weekend, so feel free to call me then if you prefer: (517) 629-5040. Then, as you know, I w i l l get a complete proposal to you by Wednesday or Thursday, for discussion at our meeting on Friday. If all goes well, Kellogg expects to hear from us by about March 15. Best regards, Maryellen J. Lewis MNF Consultant A'n Association of Foundations and Corfj<>rnti»i> Making Grants for Charitable Pur}><.>*< s. �(3rd draft, 2/19/90) Proposal: To Implement the Michigan Nonprofit Forum Summary: Leaders of ten statewide organi zations concerned with voluntarism and philanthropy in Michigan have been working as a Steering Committee since August 1988 to design the Michigan Nonprofit Forum: a strategic network of statewide organizations that wi 11 seek to advance the shared i nterests and concerns of Michigan's nonprofit sector. Those founding members now propose to implement the Forum to operate over the next five years, guided by its Steering Committee of ten to fifteen member organizations (represented on the Steering Committee by their Presidents/Chairs and thei r CEOs). The founding Steering Committee members include the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan, the Counci1 of Michigan Foundations, the Michigan Association of. School Administrators, the Michigan Association of School Boards, the Michigan Community College Association, the Michigan Council for the Arts, the Michigan Health Council, the Michigan League for Human Services, the Presidents Council of State Universities of Michigan, and the United Way of Michigan. The primary mission of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum w i l l be: to promote the awareness and effectiveness of Michigan's nonprofit sector and to help advance the cause of voluntari sm and philanthropy in the state. Toward that end, the MNF w i l l promote dialogue, cooperation and collaboration across fields (health, human services, arts and humanities, community development, education, religion) to address mutual problems, strengthen the sector as a whole, and raise p u b l i c awareness and recognition of the sector's significant contri butions. To accomplish this mission, the Forum w i l l undertake activities in these four areas over the next five years: (1) Dialogue: The Forum w i l l regularly convene discussions among sector leaders on key and emerging issues, such as those related to taxes, governance and l i a b i l i t y ; it w i l l serve both as a catal yst for understandi ng and a resource for further action. Further, through cooperation with existing networks across the state—such as those represented by the member organizations—the Forum w i l l promote dissemination of that kind of dialogue throughout all levels of the sector, in order to raise the quality and extent of local discussion and �•informed action "in the state as a whole. (2) Information Sharing and Research: The Forum will also compile and disseminate current information and insights, as a basis for analysis, planning and action in the state, both within the sector and among policymakers and the public. It w i l l not only serve as a responsive "clearinghouse" of information on the nonprofit sector (with a Michigan bent), but w i l l also serve a leadership role in raising awareness and understanding of emerging issues. In particular, it w i l l serve as an information resource on Michigan's nonprofit sector for those seeking to advance the cause of voluntarism and philanthropy in the state. The Forum w i l l also seek to strengthen the network among Michigan scholars of the nonprofit sector, so that a more solid knowledge base w i l l underlie p u b l i c policy and practice in the state. In collaboration with Michigan's colleges and universities, the Forum w i l l promote collaborative analysis and broader reporting on the role, diversity, capacity and impact of the nonprofit sector in Michigan. (3) Advocacy: The Steering Committee represents unique access to a large part of the nonprofit sector in Michigan. Although member organizations monitor issues impacting their fields, the MNF w i l l serve as a hub for gathering and disseminating critical information on sector-wide issues. The Forum w i l l serve as an efficient exchange on current policy issues shared across the nonprofit sector, keeping Michigan's nonprofit sector f u l l y informed and up to date. Also, on issues of common concern, based on unanimous consent of the Steering Committee, the Forum w i l l add its voice in the policy arena and its efforts to m o b i l i z i n g support throughout the state. f4) Capacity-Bui 1 ding: W h i l e many support services are provided by Michigan's nonprofit associations, many nonprofits have not been reached. Nonetheless, human resource and organizational development in the nonprofit sector are w i d e l y recognized as critical investments for the 1990s. Therefore, working through its member organizations, the MNF w i l l seek to identify existing in-state resources for technical assistance and education in philanthropy and voluntarism, as well as areas of need and interest in the state. Using that information as a guide, the MNF w i l l work to match assistance/experience with need/interest, and to develop local and regional structures that w i l l sustain that kind of assistance in the future. The Forum not only w i l l provi de a mechanism for i ncreasi ng awareness of resources across the sector but also w i l l serve as a catalyst for collaborative planning and action. �Workolan [Timeline to followl START-UP TASKS Establish office and procedures. Schedule quarterly Steering Committee meetings, for governance and plannlng. Compile segmented resource list of associations and organizations, service centers and providers, MI scholars of the nonprofit sector, key c i v i c leaders, other knowledgeable persons—for MNF's operating network. Develop liaisons Interns. with colleges and universities for student Develop collaborative mechanisms with associations organizations conducting related work In the state. and Disseminate information about the MNF: written and oral presentations through newsletters and state/local/reglonal meetlngs. Develop working relations with key state leaders and personnel for legislative updates and Information sharing. Collect and compile existing MI and local Information and materials (e.g., local surveys of nonproflts) that w i l l supplement and augment Information to be received from MSU's current statewide "snapshot" of the MI nonprofit sector—to begin to establish the MNF Information Clearinghouse. ACTIVITIES CV f1) Dialogue Identify key participants for productive bi-monthly forums. Identify issues and resource persons. Conduct six bi-monthly MNF Lansing Forums annually. Identify local sponsors and resource persons for local/regional Forums, to carry the dialogue about critical Issues to the grassroots level. Conduct six local/regional forums annually. Cultivate local/regional spin-off dialogues (two per year) that �w i l l be self-sustaining and mutually-reinforcing through the MNF network. Develop dissemination mechanisms for state/reglonal/local Forum Insights, Including a quarterly MNF Newsletter. (2) Information-Sharing and Research Collect and d i s t i l l current Information Into Issues papers—and/or arrange for experts to prepare non-technical papers In their areas of expertise—on the nonprofit sector, especially the role, diversity, capacity and Impact of the nonprofit sector In Michigan. (12 per year.) Develop and use a dissemination network for the issue papers, i n c l u d i n g member organi zations (for distribution to thei r members) and key civic leaders across the state. Develop a mechanism for responding to specific inquiries about the Michigan nonprofit sector—that is, implement the MNF Information Clearinghouse. Develop collaborative mechanisms for networking among scholars of the MI nonprof11 sector, i ncludi ng the MNF Research Update (quarterly—probably a column of the newsletter). Through member organizations, identify research and policy issues to guide researchers of the sector. Through member organizations, facilitate research to investigate those questions. Conduct or co-sponsor two "scholars forums" on the MI nonprofit sector annually, focussing on issues of pressing concern in this state. Through member organizations and the media, disseminate MI research insights. With the Michigan Community College Association, develop and implement a MNF computer bulletin board (using the MCCA facility and 800 number), including a menu of sector-wide resources (such as legislative updates, updates on funding sources, workshops, technical assistance), as well as fieldspecific communications maintained by sponsoring organizations (e.g., neighborhood associations information). Develop and implement a strategy to l i n k major communities and regions, then others, into the MNF computer network. �(3) Advocacy Develop 1Inkages for gathering and disseminating Information on critical and emerging Issues common to the MI nonprofit sector (such as the ongoing "legislative updates"—a column In the newsletter and a section of the computer bulletin board). Develop efficient communication 1Inkages (through member organizations, nonprof1t clrculars, conferences, local forums and associations, the media, other communication hubs) for getting Information out through the state, and gathering Insight In. Develop a media relations strategy, and disseminate targeted press releases regularly, to raise p u b l i c awareness of the MI nonprofit sector and the Issues affecting It. Based on unanimous consent of the Steering Committee, use those mechanisms to mobilize joint action on Issues shared across the MI nonprofit sector. (4) Capacity-BuiIdlng Identify and contact all In-state sources of technical assistance and human resource development for MI nonprofit organizations (e.g., on fundralslng, board development, management, p u b l i c relations, volunteer recruitment; also Insurance pools, joint purchasing). Identify and contact all In-state Initiatives to promote voluntarism and philanthropy, especially those In precollege and higher education Institutions. Through member organizations, Identify areas of need and Interest not currently served. Help to match assistance/experience with unmet need/Interest. Develop collaborative strategies that w i l l establish local/regional structures (two per year) to sustain these kinds of supports eventually In all parts of the state, linked through the MNF network. Through local sponsors, conduct four practical workshops annually, related to the MNF mission. �MNF BUDGET (annual for 5 years) PERSONNEL COSTS Executive director (range: salary & 2Q% fringe) Admin, secretary (range: salary & 20% fringe) 2 rotating student internships Staff travel $48-60,000 21-27,000 25,000 4,000 OFFICE EXPENSE *Rent & utilities (includes 3 pkg spaces) 4,200 *Office equipment (including 2 PC systems, 4 phones, 1 typewriter) (UNITED WAY OFFERS USE OF COPIER & FAX) 10,000 Furniture (in addition to donated) 1,000 Telephone: Instal1 ation (3 1ines, 4 stations) Monthly @ $300. 500 3,600 *Photocopies 2,500 Supplies 1,500 Subscriptions & publications Mi sc. overhead 1,000 2,000 * To be reimbursed to United Way PROGRAM EXPENSES 4 steering committee meetings 400 6 Forums in Lansing 1,800 6 regional/local forums (in cooperation with local sponsors) 1,800 1 presentation to a national conference 1,000 [Grantmaker/Grantseeker co-sponsorshi p??] ???? Honoraria for 8 papers/presentations @250 Related travel (12 @ $125) 2,000 1,500 �Publication and dissemination costs (above in-kind contributions by MNF member organizations) 3,000 Computer bulletin board: operators (6 @ $100/mo.) 7,200 honoraria for network 10 modums/year for new network hubs, O200 2,000 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_CMF-1990-Draft-Proposal-to-Implement-MNF Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1990-02-22 CMF draft proposal to implement MNF Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1990-02-22 CMF draft proposal to implement MNF. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49457 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990-02-22 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/ae777ab522b84eec10daa4348d3a37f7.pdf 368d30a4c6cf447211018369f7631009 PDF Text Text APPENDICES Board of Trustees Roster Action Framework generated by the Trustees at the October 1990 Annual Meeting Michigan Volunteer Coalition Roster and Design for the Campaign for Voluntarism Sample Clearinghouse Letters Union Institute Proposal (not funded) -describes strategy to implement Computer Bulletin Board Public Policy Committee Roster, Operating Framework and Position Statements Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar ill Committee Roster and Program Finance and Membership Committees' Design for Alternative Funding Sources 1990-91 Financial Statement for the Kellogg Foundation Grant �10/16/90 MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 300 N. Washington Square, Suite 405, P.O. Box 18219, Lansing, Michigan 48901-8219 MNF Board of Trustees AT LARGE MEMBERS Richard H. Austin secretary of State Treasury Building, First Floor 430 w. Allegan Lansing, MI 48918 517/373-2510 Fax: 373-0727 John s. Lore Senior Vice President st. John Health Corporation 22101 Moross Road Detroit, MI 48236 313/296-8680 Fax: 296-8699 Helen Milliken Board Member, Women's Research and Education Institute, Congressional caucus for Women 6103 Peninsula Drive Traverse City, MI 49684 616/946-0660 Fax: 267-5857 George Romney Chairman The National Volunteer Center 1840 E. Valley Road Bloomfield Hills, MI 48013 313/642-5011 Fax: 642-5759 Russell G. Mawby CEO and Chairman W.K. Kellogg Foundation 400 North Avenue Battle Creek, MI 49017-3398 616/968-1611 Fax: 968-0413 ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERS Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan Edward o. Blews, Jr. President Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan 650 Michigan National Tower Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-9160 Fax: 372-9165 Melvin L. Vulgamore President Albion College Albion, MI 49224 517/629-0210 Fax: 629-0509 Council of Michigan Foundation Dorothy A. Johnson President Council of Michigan Foundations One South Harbor Ave., Suite 3 Grand Haven, MI 49417 616/842-7080 Fax: 842-1760 John E. Marshall III President The Kresge Foundation 5215 Big Beaver Road P.O. Box 3151 Troy, MI 48007-3151 313/643-9630 Fax: 643-0588 �Council of Michigan Urban Leagues Michigan Association of School Boards N. Charles Anderson President Urban League of Detroit 208 Mack Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 313/832-4600 Fax: 832-3222 Justin P. King Executive Director Michigan Association of School Boards 421 W. Kalamazoo Street Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-5700 Fax: 371-5338 Joyce A. Brown President Battle Creek Urban League 182 w. Van Buren Battle Creek, MI 49017 616/962-5553 (no fax) R. Kenneth Gruber Executive Director Impressions 5 Science Museum 200 Museum Road Lansing, MI 48933 517/485-8166 Fax: 485-8135 Jewish Community Council Michigan Catholic Conference David G. Gad-Harf Executive Director Jewish Community Council 163 Madison Avenue Detroit, MI 48826 313/962-1880 Fax: 962-1885 Sr. Monica Kostielney Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference 505 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-9310 Fax: 372-3940 Paul D. Borman Chief Federal Defender 2255 Penobscot Building Detroit, MI 48226 313/961-4150 Fax: 962-1886 Board Representative Michigan Association of School Administrators INTERIM TRUSTEE: Charles w. Butler CNBC Chair and Pastor New Calvary Baptist Church 3975 concord Avenue Detroit, MI 48207 313/923-1600 (no fax) Don R. Elliott Executive Director Michigan Association of School Administrators 421 w. Kalamazoo Street Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-5250 Fax: 371-9093 Paul R. Williams Superintendent Lakeview Schools 15 Arbor Street Battle Creek, MI 49015 616/965-3080 Fax: 965-3068 * * -2- Michigan Chapter, Council of National Black Churches (in Formation) Invited, not yet confirmed �Michigan Community Action Agency Association Herbert Yamanishi Executive Director Michigan Community Action Agency Association 106 w. Allegan, #451 Lansing, MI 48933 5171484-1353 (no fax) Barbara D. Young Executive Director Kalamazoo county Human Services Department 201 w. Kalamazoo Avenue Kalamazoo, MI 49007 616/384-8000 Fax: 383-8862 Michigan Community College Association Thomas M. Bernthal Executive Director Michigan Community Coll~ge Association 2100 Michigan National Tower Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-4350 Fax: 372-0905 Richard W. McDowell President Schoolcraft College 18600 Haggerty Road Livonia, MI 48152 313/462-4400 Fax: 462-4470 Michigan Council for the Arts Barbara K. Goldman Executive Director Michigan Council for the Arts 1200 sixth Ave., suite 1180 Detroit, MI 48226 313/237-3735 Fax: 256-3781 Leon s. Cohan Senior Vice President and General Counsel Detroit Edison 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 313/237-8000 Fax: 237-7098 Michigan Ecumenical Forum Steven L. Johns-Boehme Executive Director Michigan Ecumenical Forum 809 Center Street Lansing, MI 48906 517/485-4395 (no fax) Leonard M. Young Michigan Region President Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 300 s. Mission Mt. Pleasant, MI 48804 517/773-6916 Fax: 773-6917 Michigan Health Council James R. Tarrant President Michigan Health council 1305 Abbott Road, suite 102 East Lansing, MI 48823 517/337-1615 Fax: 351-3560 Beverly T. McDonald, R.D.H. Past President Michigan Dental Hygienist Association 6715 Wellesley Waterford, MI 48095 313/634-7211 (no fax) Michigan League for Human Services Beverley L. McDonald Executive Director Michigan League for Human Services 300 N. Washington Square, Suite 401 Lansing, MI 48933 517/487-5436 Fax: 371-4546 Gale Colwell Executive Director The Community House 380 S. Bates Street Birmingham, MI 48009 313/644-5832 (no fax) -3- �Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director Presidents council, State Universities of Michigan 230 N. Washington Sq., #302 Lansing, MI 48933 517/482-1563 Fax: 482-1241 James J. Duderstadt President University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1340 313/764-6270 Fax: 936-0775 United Way of Michigan Robert E. Ivory President United Way of Michigan 300 N. Washington Sq., Suite 405 Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-4360 Fax: 371-4546 Helen c. Philpott Chair Community Foundation of Greater Fl i nt 1212 Woodlawn Park Drive Flint, MI 48503 313/239-8768 (no fax) -4- �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/353-1872 Summary of Small Group Reports from the 10/16/90 Meeting of the MNF Board of Trustees I. "To promote the awareness of Michigan's nonprofit sector" Group 1 concluded that a great deal is being done to make the public aware of specific seqments of the nonprofit sector, but little is being done to promote general awareness of the sector as a whole. The group discussed four steps which could be taken to address this information gap: 1)Clarify public understanding of the identity of the nonprofit sector 2)Combine resources of member agencies to raise the generalawareness J)Convene educational, legislative, and media groups to educate them 4)Find and recognize outstanding nonprofits II. "To promote the effectiveness of Michigan's nonprofit sector" Group 2 discussed the concept of effectiveness and discussed ten ways in which they felt the overall effectiveness of nonprofits could be increased: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) Share information Broker technical expertise Form a clearinghouse of ideas Share program and service successes Coordinate advocacy on issues of concern Offer professional developmental services (promote expertise for nonprofits) Find ways to introduce philanthropy into public education and the general community Increase positive image of nonprofits (e.g., through the press) Emphasize connection between non- and for-profit sectors Promote the sector's ability to communicate successes �III "To advance the cause of voluntarism" Group 3 discussed the need to {1) promote greater public understanding of the rationale for volunteering, and (2) involve schools and colleges in volunteer efforts to foster a lifelong commitment to volunteering by today's youth. The group made two recommendations: IV. 1} MNF should be supportive of Michigan's volunteer institutions, including at least the thirteen volunteer centers and the United Ways, as they prepare for the President's Points of Light Foundation media blitz and its implications for Michigan. 2) A voluntarism coordinating committee needs to be established through the MNF. This committee would most appropriately be chaired by George Romney. "To advance the cause of philanthropy" Group 4 discussed ten proposals which they felt would advance the cause of philanthropy: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Research and analyze contribution data in Michigan in order to determine where gaps exist. This information should be provided to the Media. Initiate a "Give 5" campaign. Disseminate information on the standards of fundraising. Educate organizations on the Charitable Solicitation Act. Focus on education {K-12). Also focus on foreign companies. Aim to help philanthropy become more pluralistic, i.e., to include minorities. MNF can provide information on various nonprofits, in order to encourage others to improve and collaborate {e.g., for greater costeffectiveness). �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, :MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An allianc~ to promot~ giving, voluntttring and a strong, ~ff~ctiv~ nonprojU s~ctor in Michigan. MNF Coordinating Committee on Voluntarism Diana Algra Executive Director MI Community Service Comm. 111 S. Capitol Bldg. P.O. Box 30013 Lansing, MI 48909 517/335-1013 N. Charles Anderson President Urban League of Detroit 208 Mack Avenue Detroit, MI 48201 313/832-4600 James Barrett President Michigan Chamber of Commerce 600 s. Walnut Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-2100 Thomas Bernthal Executive Director Michigan Community College Assn. 2100 Michigan National Tower Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-4350 Janet Blanchard, Co-Chair Former First Lady State of Michigan P.O. Box 888 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48303 Edward 0. Blews President Assn. of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan 650 Michigan National Tower Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-9160 Charles w. Butler Chair, Council of National Black Churches and Pastor New Calvary Baptist Church 3975 Concord Avenue Detroit, MI 48207 313/923-1600 Mary Cady President Michigan Assn. of Volunteer Administrators 2029-C s. Elms Road Swartz Creek, MI 48473 313/230-0244 Lynette Campbell Director Neighborhood Assn. of Michigan 835 W. Genessee Lansing, MI 48915 517/485-4200 Janet Clark RSVP Director Greater Lansing VAC 6035 Executive Drive #105 Lansing, MI 48911 517/887-8004 Gale Colwell Chair, Michigan League for Human Services Executive Director The Community House 380 s. Bates Street Birmingham, MI 48009 313/644-5832 �Barbara Conrad Volunteer Services Director Michigan Dept. of Social Services P.O. Box 30037 Lansing, MI 48909 517/373-9210 Michelle Engler, Co-Chair First Lady State of Michigan P.O. Box 30013 Lansing, MI 48909 517/335-7803 Frank Garrison President AFL-CIO 419 s. Washington Blvd. Lansing, MI 48901 517/487-5966 Elaine Gordon Coordinator Partnerships for Education P.O. Box 30008 Lansing, MI 48909 517/373-1809 Ernest B. Gutierrez Program Officer The Kresge Foundation P.O. Box 3151 Troy, MI 48007 313/643-9630 Charles Infante Contributions Director The Dow Chemical Company Willard H. Dow Center Midland, MI 48674 517/636-3620 William Ives Past Director Rotary Clubs International cfo Rose Exterminator P.O. Box 309 Troy, MI 48099 313/588-7005 Robert E. Ivory President United Way of Michigan 300 N. Washington Sq., #405 Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-4360 Steven Johns-Boehme Executive Coordinator Michigan Ecumenical Forum 809 Center Street Lansing, MI 48906 517/485-4395 Gerard Keidel Executive Director Michigan Assn. of School Administrators 421 w. Kalamazoo Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-5250 Mary E. Kennedy Chair, MI Corporate Volunteer Council Second Vice President National Bank of Detroit 611 Woodward Avenue Detroit, MI 48226 313/225-1085 Justin P. King Executive Director Michigan Assn. of School Boards 421 W. Kalamazoo Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-5700 Sr. Monica Kostielney Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference 505 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-9310 Maryellen J. Lewis, ex officio Executive Director Michigan Nonprofit Forum 34 Kellogg Center East Lansing, MI 48824-1022 517/353-5038 �Beverly A. McDonald, R.D.H. Secretary Michigan Health Council 6715 Wellesley Waterford, MI 48095 313/634-7211 Darryl White Chairperson Volunteer Centers of Michigan 220 w. Main st., ste. 103 Midland, MI 48640 517/631-7660 Helen c. Philpott Chair Community Foundation of Greater Flint 1212 Woodlawn Park Drive Flint, MI 48503 313/239-8768 Edith Wieland Chair Michigan School Volunteers Programs 293 Lagoon Beach Drive Bay City, MI 48706 517/684-3531 Sharon Radtke Executive Director Greater Lansing VAC 6035 Executive Drive, #105 Lansing, MI 48911 517/887-8004 Herbert Yamanishi Executive Director Michigan Community Action Agency Association 106 w. Allegan, #451 Lansing, MI 48933 517/484-1353 Gov. George Romney 1840 E. Valley Road Bloomfield Hills, MI 313/642-5011 Leonard M. Young Secretary, Michigan Ecumenical Forum Region President RLDS Church 300 s. Mission Mt. Pleasant, MI 48804 517/773-6916 48013 Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director Presidents Council, State Universities of MI 230 N. Washington Sq., #302 Lansing, MI 48933 517/482-1563 Michael Tate Assistant Director Cooperative Extension Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824 517/355-2308 James Votruba Vice Provost of University outreach Michigan state University East Lansing, MI 48824 517/353-8977 Beverly Wesner President Michigan PTA 1011 N. Washington Lansing, MI 48906 517/485-4345 3 �MICIDGAN'S CAMPAIGN FOR VOLUNTEERISM Honorary Chairs Hon. & Mrs. John Swainson Hon. & Mrs. George Romney Hon. & Mrs. William Milliken Hon. & Mrs. James Blanchard Hon. & Mrs. John Engler CAMPAIGN CHAIRS Janet Blanchard Campaign Co-Chair Michelle Engler Campaign Co-Chair Frank Popoff Campaign Co-Chair Robert Stempel Campaign Co-Chair SUBCO:MMITfEE ON STATEWIDE PROMOTION: Michelle Engler, Chair; Frank Popoff and Robert Stempel, Co-Chairs SUBCOMMITTEE ON REGIONAULOCAL PROMOTION: Janet Blanchard, Chair; Robert Stempel, Co-Chair/Southeast Michigan and Frank Popoff, Co-Chair/Outstate Campaign Committee AFUCIO Association of Independent Colleges & Universities of Michigan Cooperative Extension Service Council of MI Black Churches Council of MI Foundations Council of MI Urban Leagues Dept. of Social Services, State of MI Junior Leagues of MI MI Association of Broadcasters MI Association of Non-Public Schools MI Association of School Administrators MI Association of Schools Board MI Assn. of Volunteer Administrators MI Campus Compact MI Catholic Conference MI Chamber of Commerce MI Community Action Agency Association MI Community College Association MI Corporate Volunteer Council MI Ecumenical Forum MI Health Council MI League for Human Services MI Nonprofit Forum MI Partners in Education MI School Volunteer Programs NAACP Neighborhood Associations of MI PTA of Michigan Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan Retired Senior Volunteer Programs of MI Rotary Clubs of MI United Way of MI Volunteer Centers of MI �SUB-COMMITTEE ON STATEWIDE PROMOTION Michelle Engler, Chair Supporting Agency: Michigan Nonprofit Forum PROMOTING WORKPLACE VOLUNTARISM lead agency: MI Corporate Volunteer Council / / Sub-Committee Charge: to conduct joint planning and collaborative action aimed at: I. increasing visibility and recognition of existing volunteer efforts 2. increasing opportunities and incentives for volunteering; an 3. creating a climate of commitment to volunteering that permeates Michigan's leadership, its institutions, and its communities. PROMOTING COLLEGE VOLUNTEERJSM lead agency: Michigan Campus Compact I I I PROMOTION TIIRU TRADE & PROFESSIONAL ASSNS. lead agencies: MI Society of Association Executives, AFL/CIO ---- / STATEWIDE MEDIA PROMOTION lead agencies: MI State Chamber of Commerce, MJ Assoc. of Broadcasters I I I I I I I I I STATEWIDE "GIVE 5" CAMPAIGN lead agencies: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Fomm, United Way of Michigan ) / / PROMOTING K-12 VOLUNTARISM lead agency: Governor's Commission/Youth Service Michigan \ \ STATEWIDE VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION CAMPAIGN lead agency: Volunteer Centers of Michigan �Sub-Committee on Regional/Local Promotion Janet Blanchard, Chair Supporting Agency: Volunteer Centers of Michigan Subcommittee Chaq:e: To strengthen Michigan infrastructures that sustain voluntarism, and especially to assist existing Volunteer Centers, assist emerging ones, and stimulate new ones. / / / GOAL#! GOAL#3 ASSIST EXISTING VOLUNTEER CENTERS •assist leadership •increase visibility •strengthen funding base STIMULATE NEW VOLUNTEER CENTERS •identify/assist leadership •increase visibility •help to provide seed money •conduct regional summits GOAL#2 ASSIST EMERGING VOLUN1EER CENTERS •assist leadership •increase visibility •help to access seed money ) �l\1ICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICffiGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An tJIIilme1 to promoll 1irin1, rol1111t11rill1 tUUl" stTOIIf, •ff•cti" IUJif/ITOjil s1ctor ill Mkhiftue. June 18, 1991 ORGtNIZA170NAL JIEJllJE1lS bttl•,.._ u.u.,.,.,;. u.u---.. "'-delbt of Memorandum To: Michigan Community Leaders From: Maryellen J. Lewis, Executive Director ofM"Idtifllll C.:O..,rur of ltlidtif- &.de CJuudtu (111jorM41kM) CowociJ of /tlidti8411 U,._ Luawu Midtis1111 A.uoci4Aoft of Sdtool Adlrtiltislr~n Your ideas and help are needed to help shape the new Youth Service Michigan plan. Dozens of Michigan leaders are working on a statewide framework -- a vision to provide quality community service opportunities for every Michigan youth. If successful, this plan will bring new Federal dollars into Michigan, to help communities strengthen their youth programs and involve youth as partners in community problem-solving. It will also create a sustainable vision for Michigan communities. Do you believe this ia a worthy goal? If so, then your ideas and commitment are needed at this critical time. M"u:lti11111 ~ At'fi<M As..cy A.uoci4Aoft Micltis"" eo--u,. eo~~e,. ~ Pru>Utw CowociJ, Sl4lc u.u~niliu of M"u:N,.. What do you believe ia a worthy goal for this plan? it possible to provide service and leadership experiences for every youth in your community? Is How might this work in your community? What pieces are already in place for a community-wide plan? How would your company or organization help? To be successful, many groups must collaborate: schools, business and industry, churches, arts and health care agencies, united ways, and many more. Can your community serve as a model to help others accomplish this teamwork? You may be hearing from others about this plan, and we urge you to respond as quickly as possible. The timeframe is very shortt The Michigan Nonprofit Forum joins with the Council of Michigan Foundations and many others to assist with the planning process. So, if you prefer, please write to the following address by July 5, 1991: Michelle Engler, Janet Blanchard & George Romney Co-Chairs Coordinating Committee on Voluntarism Michigan Nonprofit Forum 34 Kellogg Center East Lansing, Michigan 48824 We look forward to hearing from you. For further information, you may want to write or call Ms. Donna M. Clarke at the Michigan Nonprofit Forum office. �.• MICIDGAN34NONPROFIT FORUM KELWGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/353-1872 Memorandum To: MNF Member Organizations and Friends From: Maryellen J. Lewis, Executive Director Subject: Upcoming Workshop on "Non-Profit Corporations and the Law" hosted by the Howell Area Chamber of Commerce Date: April 3, 1991 cc: Russell G. Mawby, MNF Chair I know this is short notice, but I just received this information on a workshop that may interest some of your members: "Non-Profit Corporations and the Law." The cost is low -- $30/$20 including refreshments -and may be within the budget of many nonprofit professionals on your networks. The event will be held next Tuesday, April 9 from 1:30 to 4:30 at the First National Bank in Howell. Part of our mission is to keep Michigan's nonprofit sector informed of quality, reasonably-priced opportunities for professional development and assistance on sector-wide . issues. I hope you will share this information with others, and let us know how else we may be helpful to you and your colleagues. ref:V.4. �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, l\flCHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/353-1872 Memorandum To: Trustees, Michigan Nonprofit Forum From: Maryellen J. Lewis, Executive Director Subject: Date: Impact Survey of Budget Reductions, Michigan Council for the Arts February 21, 1991 For your information, I enclose a recent survey of the immediate impact of state budget cuts on the Michigan nonprofit arts community. The survey was limited to grantees of the Michigan Council for the Arts, which conducted the survey, and it focussed on financial liabilities, loss of jobs, cancelled activities, numbers of students impacted, and related issues. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me, or call Bunny Goldman, Executive Director of the Michigan Council for the Arts: 313/256-3735. Several other associations are conducting impact surveys, and others are compiling examples of successful responses and coping strategies. As this information comes in, I will keep you all informed. If you are aware of other surveys or reports that have sector-wide implications, would you please let me know? This is a time when information will be a critical ingredient for constructive dialogue and action. ref:IV.4. �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 Kellogg Center, East Lansing, Michigan 48824 February 15, 1991 Application to the Union Institute·s Project on Statewide Associations for a Capacity-Building Challenge Grant 1. Describe the aspects of your organization that need strengthening or expansion. Identify your priorities and explain why you selected them. Our underdeveloped communication system now stands as a significant barrier to effective fulfillment of our mission. (See mission statement/Executive Summary) The clearinghouse function rests at the··· he .. r-t-. of the design of this organization. However, the cle~~~ghcuse is only one among many implementation responsibilities carried by the single fulltime professional staff person (with one support stat f person) . It has become apparent,. none the 1 ess, that the clearinghouse function must become operational cuickly. in order for the Michigan Nonprofit Forum to functiqn in all qther areas qf its missiqn. Once it is made operational, staff and interns can use and maintain the system to support MNF programs. Background. The Michigan Nonprofit Forum was designed to interface and augment services to nonprofits already provided in Michigan, and then to achieve goals only possible through sector-wide collaboration. Many of the services just now emerging in other states are already provided by Michigan organizations such as the Michigan League for Human Services, the Michigan Council for the Arts, and the Michigan Ecumenical Forum -- yet without reaching all nonprofits, and without achieving the "synergy " which a sector-wide alliance might achieve. The Michigan Nqnprofit Forum was desiQned tp achieye that synerQY through communication, planning and collaborative action. Example: As a result of MNF "s efforts, we are now working with the Michigan League for Human Services, the Michigan Environmental Council, the Battle Creek Urban League, the Detroit News and many local nonprofit partners in five Michigan cities to implement the �-3must accelerate development of the clearinghouse function -gathering, synthesizing and disseminating information in specific topical areas -- in order to move ahead in each of our mission areas. We must also accelerate the development of communication "hubs" around the state -- collaborative arrangements with local agencies which participate in the emerging computer hook-up, "fax tree," and other communication systems, and which serve as dissemination points to local communities of nonprofits. We must also orient/train our collaborators to use the systems; we must provide test information to demonstrate its worth; and we must evaluate and adjust the systems to best serve the needs of communities and the sector statewide. Also, since these "communication technologies " are at the heart of the unique services we can offer to Michigan ' s nonprofit sector, and therefore to potential members, we must advance this capacity in · order to expand and develop our membership base. The core of Clarification of MNF Memberships. MNF's membership are its statewide associations -Organizational Members -- which represent nonduplicative fields in the nonprofit sector. Each Organizational Member brings two representatives to the MNF Board, one a rotating elected practitioner from one of their members (e.g., a local human service agency or school), and the other the appointed executive serving the field statewide. This stable core insures that the policy-making board includes representation from these major parts of the nonprofit sector. In addition, the MNF Bylaws provide for Associate Members, who may be any other association or network related to the nonprofit sector, and for Individual Members. The Board is now developing these membership$. 2. Describe the program, service or administrative functjon that your on~anization would like to beQin or improve. Our current budget was designed to support the operation of the communication function through rotating student internships -- short commitments by students, for example to review an area of cutting-edge research or practice and prepare an " issue paper " or column for the newsletter -- and by pooled information from our member organizations (such as research universities, government relations staffs of United Ways, planning staffs of Community Action Agencies and Urban Leagues, and so on). �-5- (b) arranging with researchers and ins~itutes to include MNF in early circulation, and (c) establishing procedures for compiling information from staffs of member agencies. (3) Implement the electronic mail utility, beginning with the MNF board members as a test case. This involves orienting participants, loading useful materials, and assessing use and making adjustments. (4) Use our new desktop publishing software to produce the mastheads and formats for the MNF newsletter, Issues Briefs and Scholars Updates, as well as other occasional publications. Produce initial issues, and market-test them. (Eventually, these will be services to members and available on a subscription basis, a necessary source of income after our first year.) (5) Compile logistical information for planning local/regional roundtables, such as meeting spaces of various sizes within nonprofit organ~zatLans - in various Michigan cities. Using our database and with the guidan-e::e of 1 oca 1 members, campi 1 e top:Lca..l. l.i..sts. .af local leaders for invitation pools. (These also become poe 1 s for so 1 i citing individual members and --· ~ .. subscribers. ) .-··; : · 3. What are the potential benefits that the nonprofit Sector in your area can ~ain from this service? If possible, quantify these benefits or describe the qualitative impact. The benefits of MNF's emerging communication resource for Michigan's nonprofit sector are still anecdotal, but we can begin to see the pattern of future benefits: -- Because we are able to report new solid numbers defining the sector ' s place in Michigan ' s economy, we have achieved increased press interest and attention. With our systems operational, we intend to keep key journalists apprised of critical sector news; (We now have nearly 350 journalists on our list -- that will increase as a result of our Michigan Communication Project, described above. l -- One quick-and-dirty study by a nonprofit in Michigan ' s "thumb" area clarified the sector's role in local employment and expenditures. Another in Grand Rapids (in process) will compile the first salary and wage data for Michigan ' s nonprofit sector. We have already referred more than a dozen other communities to �-75. Describe some other program, service or administrative system your Qroyp has started and run, that indicates YOu woyld be successful with this new endeavor. Several projects are described in #1 above. In addition, we will conduct the third annual Grantmakers/Grantseekers Workshop on May 10, and the program is fully committed (program attached). Although MNF was not yet funded last spring, current MNF staff coordinated last year's Workshop, attended by nearly 1200 nonprofit professionals. 6. What level of financial assistance do you need? We request a grant of $15,000, to cover the cost of a Special Program Assistant and related phone, postage, .copying and travel, in order to accelerate the development of our communication system. For us to fulfill our mission effectively, the development of this function must occur now, quickly, rather than parallel to other maturing systems. Most of the costs of this endeavor are elready budgeted or contributed. The bulletin board itself is-. dcnated ·. by the Michigan Community College Association. The modems · (for ten "hubs" per year) are included in our Kellogg grant. The student assistants, who will maintain the information system once operational, are already lined up as volunteers and rotating interns (included in the Kellogg grant). Information from our members is contributed. Software is already purchased, and publications are budgeted. What we need is an extra pair of hands, and some technical expertise, to complete our communication system as soon as possible. BUDGET: Special Program Assistant (fulltime for six months or, more likely, a graduate student working part-time now, fulltime in summer, part-time in fall ) 2,000 Fringe ( 201.) Phone ( $200/month for six months) 510,000 long distance, Travel for 1,200 1,000 Postage, copies and supplies TOTAL 800 15,000 �-9student interns to develop procedures for their work, which will continue to support the communi~ation system beyond this special project. Spend regular periods entering timely information into the bulletin board: Public policy information, training opportunities, new management insights, etc. Incorporate writing by student interns. Where appropriate, initiate interns to the technology. Informally check the use and value of the materials with users, and compile and review suggestions with staff for improvements. Maintain the e-mail, and check on its use informally, for review and improvements. Begin travelling to "hub" communities, to orient staff, develop procedures, trouble-shoot. Begin expanding local/regional contacts and logistical information, for planning roundtables. Produce one newsletter, one Public Policy Issue, and one Scholars Update. Disseminate to a selected group, with a questionnaire for assessing its value. Months 5-6: Continue operating bulletin board and e-mail, making adjustments. Train staff and student interns to operate independently. Train staff and interns to use the desktop publishing software. Compile responses to the questionnaire, with staff for improvements. review Develop an evaluation procedure with staff to assess the short- and longterm impact of MNF ' s new communication technology. 9. Will this effort move your association towards self-sufficiency? Exolain how. and include both gualitatiye and quantitative projections. As explained above, this grant will allow us to accelerate the development of our central communication function, which is needed now, in order for us to fulfill our mission. For us to recruit new members and income from �APPENDICES 1. 1990-1991 Budget 2. Program for Grantmakers/Grantmakers Seminar III 3. MNF Mission/Executive Summary 3. MNF Board of Trustees 4. MNF Coordinating Committee on Voluntarism 5. Letters of Endorsement �Michigan Ecumenical Forum 809 Ce nt er- S tr ee t. St. l l e 78 . Lans1 ng, M1 ch i gan 48906 (5 17) 4B5-4395 ~ t ev en L Johns -Boeh me Coo ro i~ator/ E x ecut i veD i rector February 15, 1991 It is with great pleasure that I am able to offer on behalf of the Michigan Ecumenical Forum this letter of unqualified support for the attached grant proposal from the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. The Michigan Ecumenical Forum, the successor body to the Michigan Council of Churches, is a nonprofit organization of the major churches and regional/local ecumenical organizations throughout the State of Michigan. As an organizational member of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum, the Michigan Ecumenical Forum is excited about the mission and goals of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. This excitement was particularly reinforced by the response of a meeting of the Michigan Church Leaders to a presentation on the Michigan Nonprofit Forum by Maryellen Lewis, Executive Director of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. The excitement lay in the importance to the Michigan Ecumenical Forum and its members in receiving throughout the year cutting-edge information on the nonorofit sector and voluntarism from the Michigan Nonprofit Forum's network, as well as in having the possibility for feedback. In an age of raoid communications, the Michigan Nonprofit Forum's i nfonnati on-sharing vi a a orooosed computer b'u 11 eti n board and electronic mail is -vital to our membershio in keeping abreast with the emerging issues revolving around the nonorofit sector and voluntarism. On behalf of the Michigan Ecume~ical Forum, I urge you to give a positive response to this grant oroposal from the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Sincerely, r.:'futttt [/. 'fhtu .(S.,j,,<L (The Rev.) Steven L. Jahns-Boehme �FEB-18-91 MON 17:41 ARC MIDLAND MI VOtliNTAHY ACTION CHNntR 01~ MII>IANI> COt NTY INC. Slt"Cl~Wit~· •· C~· llh'l" • :.!:.!0 W. Mnln Stn·"·t • Midluucl, ~II ~;4t>-nl:\7 (::i 17) ();i 1-7f;()() February 18, 1991 Maryellen Lew~• Michiqan Nonprof~t Fozum 34 Kelloqq Center !&It Lan11ng, MI 41824-1022 Me. The Volunta%y Action Canter of Midland County would like to •ndor•• the concept of the Michiqan Nonprof~t rorum (MNF) serv1nq •• the etata-wide clear1nqhou1e reepcnlible for areas which benefit all M1ch1qan nonprofit orqanizationa . We bel.1eve th11 "hub" concept woul.d be of ~reat benef1c1&l value fot the Nichiqan nonprofit community, in both the f1nanc1&l and voluntee% area• o£ their operationa. The MNF eould p:ov1de •••1•tance th:ouqh1 1. Re•eazch update• -Many aqanci•• would xelieh havinq a tie into reeearch data wh~ch could be directly applied to their &%&a(•) of need and intereet . 2. Public policy update• - Leqi•lative action often impacta on many of the exi•tinq nonprofit orqan1zat1one. but it 1s difficult for smaller aqenciel to 1tay current. 3. Proqram Innovat1on•/Stat1•t1c•/Id••• - New proqrame are continually being initiated to addre•• aqe-old and/or new problem•. Throuqh th~• tradinq of information, the wheel would not need to be re-invented 10 often . 4. Electroaic ~•+l 1y1tem - Through the eatabliahment of a •tate-wide linkaqe 1y1tem, nonprofit orqanizat1ont could aha:• idea• me~• 1ucoes1fully , effio1ently and effect1vely . The uae of the KN! in th11 clear1nqhou • • function would b•nef1t all nonpJ:o!it participant•. Idea• could be shared 1n a prompt and eff1c1ent manner, alent; with develop.1nq a ba•• o£ information fo: futu~e u1e. P.02 �l..NITED ~ CF !'ORE CTY 123 Pe2 P.O. Box94a 8 ScUtl Monroe Street Monroe. Mld'IIQM 48181 Phone: (313) ~~-1331 FAX: (S1 S) 2.112·3378 February 18, 1991 Maryellen J. Lewis, Executive Oirector Michigan Nonprofit Forum 34 Kellogg canter East Lanainq, MI 48824-1022 Oear Maryellen: Please accept this letter as a confirmation of our meeting on January ~4, 1991, in my office, to ~iscuas your organization's questions an~ role in the state of Michigan with the nonprofit comaunity. And, to reaffirm to you my endorsement of your agency's service. The need tor information on pu.b lic policy, training in our field that addresses local and state issues, and collaboratinq with others to resolve these issues common to each of us would, indeed, be an invaluable aid to the citizens of our respective counties, as well as our state. With the cuts in human services being made at both the federal and state levels couple~ with the slow economy made worse by the war in the Golf, the need to "beef up our effective and efficient ~•livery ot services will never be more important. I aee your agency's service as a tool we can use to have these skills already in place for us to do the job that will need to be done. 11 Looking forward to working with you in the months and years ahead, I am, In community service, s;_nc.•.rely , < '. .. . ~~:::zc;;A- ;~4 . c.o. cappuccilli, Executive Director united Way of Monroe County CDC/ln �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An allianct to promott giving, voluntttring and a strong, t/ftctivt nonprofit stctor in Michigan. Michigan Nonprofit Forum Public Policy Committee Roster (September 24, 1991) Edward o. Blews, Committee Chair President Association of Independent Colleges & Universities of Michigan Richard B. Austin, Secretary of State State of Michigan Joyce A. Brown, President Battle Creek Urban League Charles w. Butler, Chair Council of National Black Churches, Michigan Chapter James J. Duderstadt, President University of Michigan David Gad-Barf, Executive Director Jewish Community Council Barbara K. Goldman, Executive Director Michigan Council for the Arts Robert E. Ivory, President United Way of Michigan Dorothy A. Johnson, President Council of Michigan Foundations constance Julius, Director of Telecommunications Michigan Community College Association Gerard Keidel, Executive Director Michigan Association of School Administrators Justin P. King, Executive Director Michigan Association of School Boards �Sr. Monica Kostielney, Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference Beverley L. McDonald, Executive Director Michigan League for Human Services Richard w. McDowell, President Schoolcraft College Caryn Nessel, Government Affairs Consultant Michigan Jewish Conference Linda Patterson, Administrative Director Council of Michigan Foundations Helen c. Philpott, Chair Community Foundation of Greater Flint Maryann Pierce, Instructor Thomas M. Cooley Law School George w. Romney, Chairman The National Volunteer Center Anne Rosewarne, President Michigan Health Council Kathleen Strauss, Chair, Government Relations committee Jewish Community Council Melvin Vulgamore, President Albion College Herbert Yamanishi, Executive Director Michigan Community Action Agency Association Maryellen J. Lewis, ex officio Michigan Nonprofit Forum -2- �PRINCIPLES OF JURISDICTION & CONSENSUS* MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE Given the wonderful diversity of the nonprofit sector, which is one of its greatest strengths, and the importance of broad consensus and a strong spirit of mutuality when addressing matters of public policy and public interest, the following principles, as articulated at the Fall 1990 initial meeting of the Board of Directors, are intended to bring focus to the work of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum's Public Policy Committee: I. MATTERS OF COMMON CONCERN: The Michigan Nonprofit Forum Public Policy Committee shall address those topics of general concern to the entire nonprofit sector, which cut across and are not limited to specific subdivisions or facets of the nonprofit sector. II. POSITIONS OF MUTUAL INTEREST: The Public Policy Committee shall develop and recommend to the Board of Directors formal positions and program initiatives (in cooperation with the Program Committee) which clearly reflect the mutual interests and common concern of all segments of the nonprofit sector represented within the Michigan Nonprofit Forum, and shall not recommend formal positions when such broad consensus and mutuality of interest cannot be achieved. A. INFORMATION SHARING: The Public Policy Committee shall serve as a clearinghouse for identification and exchange of information on policy issues of concern to the nonprofit sector and activities and initiatives of the various Members of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum which are of interest to other Forum Members. B. PROGRAM INITIATIVES: The Public Policy Committee may recommend to the Michigan Nonprofit Forum Board of Directors professional development program initiatives to serve Forum Members in the area of public policy. III. UNANIMITY/CONSENSUS: The By-Laws of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum (Article III, Section 7) stipulate that a unanimous vote is required for adoption of public policy positions by the Board of Directors; therefore, the Public Policy Committee as a practical matter shall operate on a principle of unanimous consensus for submitting recommendations to the Board of Directors. IV. PROCEDURAL ROLE: The role of the Public Policy Committee is to serve as a working committee for discussing and internally analyzing matters of public policy and submitting recommendations to the Board of Directors; the Public P alley Committee in itself does not have the authority to adopt or announce positions or declarations. *Adopted by Michigan Nonprofit Forum Public P alley Committee on April 4, 1991. EOB :bg :37.55 �.. -... - MICIDGAN34NONPROFIT FORUM KEJ.I.()GG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1021 Phone: 5171353-5038 Fax: 5171353-1872 Proposed Position Statement on the Bulk Mail Rate Increase for Nonprofit Organizations BACKGROUND In the past, nonprofit organizations have paid a lower, or ."preferred" rate to mail bulk materials, including programrelated materials and solicitation letters for tax-exempt contributions. In February, that rate increased substantially, and current proposals could increase the rate in october by as much as another 45%. RECOMMENDATION: THAT THE BOARD OF THE MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM UNANIMOUSLY ADOPT A POSITION URGXRG FULL WORDING OF THB PRBWBRRBD BULK MAILING RATB WOR NONPROFIT ORGARIZATIONS. FURTHER, THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BE AUTHORIZED TO CONVEY .THIS POSITION TO THE MICHIGAN CONGRESSIONAL 'DELEGATION AND MEMBERS OF THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, AND TO NOTIFY MNF TRUSTEES AND OTHER ·NONPROFIT LEADERS THROUGHOUT MICHIGAN. Rationale: In order to maintain the rate at post-February levels, Congress must earmark $649 million specifically for this purpose. Unless congress appropriates full funding in the next few weeks, the nation's nonprofit sector will face a significant handicap in the challenging years ahead. Both the House and Senate budget committees have recommended reduced funding. In the next week or so, their recommendations will go to a Conference Committee that has yet to be appointed after which allocation decisions will be made by Congress. Time is limited, but the decision has such far-reaching implications that it deserves our deliberate participation. �RECOMMENDED POSITION PAPER ON FEDERAL TAX DEDUCTIBILITY OF CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM Background Historically, Congress has provided in the Internal Revenue Code for the full deductibility from income taxes of charitable contributions to recognized nonprofit organizations holding Federal 501( c) tax-exempt status and organized and operated for religious, charitable, sdentific, educational and certain other purposes. For many years, that full deductibility of charitable contributions has been available to taxpayers filing Schedule A as part of the long-form tax filing. In 1981, the Congress established a new "non-itemizer 11 charitable contribution deduction of up to $100 for persons who file the short form and do not utilize Schedule A. Regrettably, the non-itemizer deduction was repealed in 1986. Then in 1990, the Congress established a floor or threshhald of 3% of income to be subtracted from Schedule A deductions (including charitable contributions) before recognizing them for tax purposes, for persons filing individual returns with income above $100,000 and for joint filers reporting income above $150,000. This new threshhold provision in the Internal Revenue Code will "sunset" or expire in 1996 unless it is renewed by the Congress. RECOMMENDED MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM POSITION THE PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THAT THE MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM ADOPT A POSITION URGING CONGRESS NOT TO RENEW (AND CERTAINLY NOT TO INCREASE) THE 3% FLOOR OR SUBTRACTION FROM SCHEDULE A DEDUCTIONS (INCLUDING CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS) FROM TAXPAYERS WITH HIGHER INCOMES, BECAUSE SUCH A FLOOR IS A PHILOSOPHICAL AND PRACTICAL DISCOURAGEMENT TO CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS WHICH ARE SO CRITICAL TO THE ABILITY OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS TO PERFORM SERVICES WHICH ARE SO VITAL TO THE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE OF THE NATION, PARTICULARLY THOSE OF MODEST MEANS OR FROM DISADVANTAGED BACKGROUNDS, AND WHICH ENORMOUSLY REDUCE THE DEMANDS AND BURDENS ON GOVERNMENT; AND FURTHER, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM BOARD OF DIRECTORS ADOPT A POSITION URGING CONGRESS TO RESTORE THE NON-ITEMIZER CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO FURTHER FOSTER THE SERVICES CITED ABOVE AND TO ENCOURAGE TAXPAYERS OF MODEST MEANS TO CONTRIBUTE; AND FURTHER, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BE AUTHORIZED TO COMMUNICATE THESE POSITIONS AND CONCERNS AS APPROPRIATE. �-2Rationale Generous charitable g1vmg and the eleemosynary spirit and hallmarks of our American society are absolutely essential to the ability of the nonprofit sector to serve so substantially the general welfare, health, education and cultural vitality of our pluralistic nation. Enlightened tax policies which recognize and encourage charitable contributions to qualifying nonprofit organizations are critically important, and have long been recognized in American law. Both the repeal of the non-itemizer deduction (granted by a recent innovation in tax policy) and the imposition of a 3\ floor on Schedule A deductions for higher income taxpayers are distressing erosions in such enlightened tax policy toward the nonprofit sector. The continuation beyond its "sunset" date and any increase in the 3\ threshhold would constitute a very serious and damaging discouragement and depression in charitable giving. Congress should be reminded of this regularly between now and the sunset date. EOB :bg:40.14 �MICmGAN34NONPROFIT FORUM KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Pboae: 5171353-5031 Fu: 5171353-1872 RECOMMENDED POSITION ON FIHANCIAL ACCOQNTING STANQARQS BOARP NONPROFIT ACCQUNTING PRQPOSALS Backgrounci The Financial Accountinq Standards Board (FASB), which sets recoqnized standards for financial accountinq and auditinq, has proposed three very siqnificant chanqes in nonprofit corporation accountinq. The proposals threaten to erode financial support for nonprofit organizations, create onerous administrative and valuation burdens and distort the financial picture of nonprofit corporations. These proposed FASB standard chanqes would: 1.) Require nonprofit orqanizations to count pledqes as actual revenues (rather than the general practice by nonprofit& currently of recordinq pledqes at the time the cash payment is received); 2.) Require nonprofits to record as revenue the value of all contributions of works of art or other items of historical siqnificance and to appraise virtually all such items in order to do so; and 3.) Require the value of services contributed to nonprofit orqanizations to be recorded as current revenues. Responses to and comments on these proposed changes are beinq souqht by the Financial Accountinq Standards Board before it renders a final decision. RECOMMENQED MICBIGAH NOHPRQFIT FORUM POSITION THAT THE PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OP THE MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM ADOPT A FORMAL POSITION EMPHATICALLY OPPOSING THE PROPOSED FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD'S CHANGES TO REQUIRE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS TO RECORD AS CURRENT REVENUES PLEDGES OF CONTRIBUTIONS, CONTRIBUTED WORKS OF ART AND ITEMS OP HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, AND CONTRIBUTED SERVICES, WHICH WOULD DISTORT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, CREATE ONEROUS ADMINISTRATIVE AND APPRAISAL BURDENS, IMPOSE MISLEADING AND INACCURATE ASSUMPTIONS, AND POTENTIALLY ERODE FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR THE NONPROFIT SECTOR; AND FURTHER, THAT THE MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BE ASKED TO CONVEY THIS POSITION TO THE FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD. �RATIONALE 1.) The FASB standard to require accrual recordinq of pledqes as current revenues would force nonprofit orqanizations to abandon the current practice qenerally of recordinq pledqes at the time the cash payment is received. The proposed standard fails to recoqnize that 100' of pledqes do not always translate into actual revenues. The line between a firm pledqe and a statement of intent is not always clear. Thouqh there have been some court decisions supportinq leqal enforcement of pledqes, it is ridiculous to imply that nonprofit& would or could qo to court to enforce pledqes. To do so would alienate donors and depress the willinqness of people to pledqe. And to count pledqes as revenues distorts the financial statements, showinq a hiqher level of income than is accurate or realistic. · 2.) Requirinq donated art and historical works to be appraised and recorded as revenues would be an unreasonable and unnecessarily costly imposition. Such qifts are rarely assets which could be sold at their appraised value to produce revenues, if the donor desired to do so. And since donors qive out of a desire to support a charitable cause rather than on the financial strenqth or statements of the orqanization, the request is simply unnecessary. 3.) To record contributed services as revenues would create an administrative niqhtmare, forcinq major new systems to track such services and methods of valuinq them. And philosophically, it desecrates or trivializes the spirit of voluntarism which is at the heart of the nonprofit sector, translatinq it from somethinq which is unique to just another thinq with a price taq attached to it. �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, :MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/353-1872 1991 Program Committee Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar III William s. Banfield President Michigan College Foundation 26101 Northwestern Highway Southfield, MI 48076 313/357-1844 Charles A. Infante Manager, Contributions Program The Dow Chemical Company Willard H. Dow Center Midland, MI 48674 517/636-3620 Keith Bankwitz, SFRE President Manager, Educational Foundation Society of Manufacturing Engineers P.O. Box 930 Dearborn, MI 48121 313/271-1500 x510 Nancy s. Ironside VP for Development Pause for Cause 300 N. Washington Square, Suite 52 Lansing, MI 48933 517/489-0610 Russell Gabier Executive Director Irving s. Gilmore Foundation 136 E. Michigan Ave., Suite 615 Kalamazoo, MI 49007 616/342-6411 Dorothy A. Johnson, Co-chair President Council of Michigan Foundations One South Harbor Ave., Suite 3 Grand Haven, MI 49417 616/842-7080 Casey Granton Program Coordinator Michigan Council for the Arts 1200 Sixth Avenue, suite 1180 Detroit, MI 48226 313/256-3718 Constance P. Julius Director, Telecommunications Michigan Community College Assn. 2100 Michigan National Tower Lansing, MI 48933 517/372-4350 R. Kenneth Gruber Executive Director Impression 5 Science Museum 200 Museum Drive Lansing, MI 48933 517/485-8116 Maryellen J. Lewis Executive Director Michigan Nonprofit Forum 300 N. Washington Square, Suite 405 Lansing, MI 48933 517/371-4360 Ernest B. Gutierrez, Jr. Program Officer The Kresge Foundation 3215 w. Big Beaver Road P.O. Box 3151 Troy, MI 48007-3151 313/643-9630 John s. Lore, Co-chair Senior Vice President St. John Health Corporation 22101 Moross Road Detroit, MI 48236 313/296-8680 �Joel J. Orosz Program Officer W.K. Kellogg Foundation 400 North Avenue Battle Creek, MI 49017-3398 616/968-1611 Paul J. Strawhecker, SFRE President Vice President, Development Northwood Institute 3225 Cook Road Midland, MI 48640 517/832-4205 Barbara Owens Director of Development U of M Dearborn 4901 Evergreen Dearborn, MI 48128 313/593-5393 James R. Tarrant President Michigan Health Council 1305 Abbott Road, Suite 102 East Lansing, MI 48823 517/337-1615 W. Calvin Patterson III Executive Director McGregor Fund 3333 W. Fort Street, Suite 1380 Detroit, MI 48226 313/963-3495 S. Mark Terman, NSFRE President Western Michigan Chapter Executive Director Library of Michigan Foundation P.O. Box 30159 Lansing, MI 48909 517/373-1297 Dianne Bostic Robinson Executive Director Barat Human Services League of Catholic Women 5250 John R Detroit, MI 48202 313/833-1525 Patricia R. Waxweiler Director of Development Genesee Substance Abuse Services 1101 Beach Street Flint, MI 48502 313/257-3201 Diana R. Sieger Executive Director Grand Rapids Foundation 209c Waters Building Grand Rapids, MI 49503 616/454-1751 Lawrence Wells Assistant to the Director Michigan League for Human Services 300 N. Washington Square, Suite 401 Lansing, MI 48933 517/487-5436 Samuel Sniderman Sr. Jacquie A. Wetherholt, SSJ Deputy Executive Director Director of Development/Grants Michigan Association of School BoardsChair, Women in Development Committee 421 W. Kalamazoo St. St. John Health Corporation Lansing, MI 48933 22101 Moross Road 517/371-5700 Detroit, MI 48226 313/296-8680 Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director Presidents Council, state Universities of Michigan 230 N. Washington Sq., #302 Lansing, MI 48933 517/482-1563 �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KEI.I.QGG CENTER EAST LANSING, :MICIUGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 Pro;posed Sources of Other Income for 1991-92 (prepared for the October 1 meeting of the MNF Finance Committee) In 1991-92, a total of$12,163 must be raised from sources other than the W.K. Kellogg Foundation ($160,163), the ten Founding Member Organintions ($10,000), MNF subscriptions ($2,000), and the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar (which is heavily subsidized and not intended to produce excess revenue for MNF general support). On August 6, the MNF Executive Committee approved a budget which proposed the following sources for that $12,163: Other Organizational Member Dues Membership Campaign General Contributions 2,000 2,000 8,163 Based on the proposals of the Membership Committee, these are some potential sources for the $8,163 of General Contributions: Individual Trustees (now 36 persons) New "Network Associates" (10 @$100-500) Agency/Individual" Associates" (40 @$50) Other Individual Donors General Support Grants 3,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 The last two - Individual Donors and General Support Grants from corporations and foundations - should also be cultivated for Year 3, when the required "General Contributions" increase sharply to $54,913. �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KEIJ.OGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 MNF 3-Year General Cash Income WXcludin& GGS) (from the 1990 Kellogg Proposal, revised 813/91) Yearl Founding Members W .K. Kellogg Foundation TOTAL 10,000 156,342 Founding Members Other Contributions/Dues W.K. Kellogg Foundation MNF Fees and Publications TOTAL 10,000 12,163 150,163 2,000 Founding Members Other Contributions/Dues W.K. Kellogg Foundation MNF Fees and Publications· TOTAL 10,000 54,913* 138,620 5,000 $166,342 Year2 $174,326 Year3 $174,933 * This revised Year 3 contributions figure reflects the added staff position (Administrative Assistant, salary range $24,000 to 28,000 plus 20% fringe) approved by the Trustees at the 5/9/91 board meeting. NOTE: Kellogg funds designated for the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar budget are not included here ($12,000 in 1991, $10,000 in 1991, $8,000 in 1991). Also, the Year 1 budget includes $9000 non-recurring start-up costs, but Years 2 & 3 include larger program budgets. Costs for outside evaluation vary from year to year, highest in the second year. Years 2 & 3 include a 5% inflation factor on most line items, required by the Kellogg Foundation's program officer in the design phase. However, these increases are moderated by minimal evaluation costs built into the design of Year 3. �( Pr-oj ec t Nu mb er ( & PO I n i ti a I s : UPMM~' TJ D FINANCIAL REPORT TO W. K. KELLOGG fOUNDATION EXPENSE STATEMENT FOR PERIOD ENDING : I Approved Budget (line items per Commitment Letter, Proposal. or approved revision) PERSONNEL MEETINGS COMPUTER BULLETIN BOARD GRANTMAKERS/GRANTSEEKERS TRAVEL EQUIPMENT OFFICE EXPE.NSE PUBLICATIONS EVALUATION TOTALS June 30, 1991 II Actual Expenditures of W!<Kf funds 101,400 5,700 7,000 12,000 8,000 9,000 18,700 3,000 7,542 77,098 1,403 0 12,000 5,182 13,084 14,769 0 0 168,342 123,536 NEXT PERIOD'S BUDGET III Differences between I & II 24,302 4,297 7,000 0 818 (4,0841 1,931 3 ,000 7,542 v IV Previously Approved Proposed (if different from IV) 99,400 9,650 3,000 10,000 6,000 0 15,800 5,000 11,313 44,806 132,706 9,850 3,000 10,000 8,ooo 11,500 15,800 5,000 11,313 16Q, 163 204,969 44,806 NOTE: Explanation should be given for substantiJl deviations in actual and/or proposed expertditures from originally approved budget items. Less WI<Kf Balanr:e (III above) 160,163 Proposed WKKf Payment I hereby certify the above ex pense statement preDared on: a cash basis (check one ~an accrual basis that applies) and resulting balance to be ( Orrect. I further ( ertify that this organization continues to be classified ~san organizat ion des cr i bed in Se ction 509(a) of the Internal Reve nu e Code. Grantee: United Way of Hi c!:Wian Robert E. Ivory, t1NF _] rea surer (please type) Chief fi nan cia l Officer Name and Ti tl e ~yellen J. L e wj~ - ~~I Executive DirectQ r (plea se type) Projec t Dire c tor Name and Ti t le Rr ii JR II Til E rOR H 1-11 Til OP IGH itd / Chief Financial Of icer ( sign l ure ) '-. (.(t?ZJ, c~/UJz / &i~~ Project Direct or <;IGt i/\ II JilES TO THE KE' (I(; gnature) FOIJNil /\ 1l llfl ( 1'11010 November 4, 1991 (Date) Nov ember 4, 1991 (Date) COP I ES UQf ACCEP l /\IJL E) �' .. Budeet Notes Financial Rax>rt to the W.K. Kello&& Foundation Period from June 1. 1990 throu&h June 30. 199~ 1. Thirteen Month Year: As discussed with our Program Officer, Joel Orosz, we have adjusted our repo¢ng period to coincide with our fiscal year 'ending June 30. To accomplish this, our first reporting year covers 13 months, including one month from the second grant~ year. Funds for that thirteenth month are included in this payment request. 2. Adjusted Second Year: For the same reason, the second year has been adjusted, excluding the first month and adding one month from the third grant year. · 3. Balance Forward: The full balance from 1990-91 has been included in the proposed revised budget for 1991-92, as discussed with our Program Officer. �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, :MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: . 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective 110nprojit sector in Michigan. Annual Prof:ress Report ~ W. K. KellOf:f: Foundation (Covering the 13-month period from June 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991) I. Introduction In May 1990, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation awarded a three-year grant to the United Way of Michigan for implementation of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum-- an alliance of organizations and individuals to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. Previously MNF had operated since August 1988 as an informal alliance, which then developed collaborative plans for a staffed entity to serve a sector-wide mission: to promote the awareness and effectiveness of Michigan's nonprofit sector. and to advance the cause of voluntarism and philanthropy in the state. Beginning on June 1, 1990 --initially supported by this grant and by additional funds from the founding organizations-- MNF was established under the direction of a Steering Committee composed of board leadership (volunteers) and executives (staff) of ten founding organizations (quickly expanded to sixteen statewide associations and organizations, and five at-large members-- list appended). This first annual Progress Report reviews the original vision of the founders and how that vision has taken shape in Michigan's rapidly evolving context. II. Summary of Proposed Project Creation of the Staffed Alliance. The newly-staffed Michigan Nonprofit Forum was created as a special kind of organization with a unique structure. It was not intended to be a free-standing organization, fully self-sufficient and independent of its members. Instead, the original design recognized Michigan's rich landscape of well-established and emerging networks serving nonprofit issues. Rather than create another competitor in a time of scarce resources, the founders sought to create a mechanism for finding common ground -- shared concerns, mutual opportunities, and collective "blind spots -- and for mobilizing joint action. They reasoned that: �"Within Michigan's nonprofit sector, many associations already exist to serve particular fields, such as health, human services, and education. Much like a chamber of commerce or a trade association, these constituency-controlled associations serve the needs of their members through advocacy (to impact tax laws and public policy), joint purchasing to achieve economies of scale, information dissemination, and/or training and technical assistance. Even so, many-- possibly most- nonprofits in Michigan, particularly medium and small agencies, are not reached by these services and operate in relative isolation. "Further, even these existing associations of nonprofits do not often work cooperatively and have no formal mechanism for planning together with the closelyallied communities of funders and government agencies. Instead, fragmentation within the sector, and lack of a comprehensively-informed public, hamper constructive development. " ... [T]he Michigan Nonprofit Forum will, for the frrst time, create a statewide mechanism for dialog, planning and cooperative action among all stakeholders in the nonprofit sector. . .. The activities of the Forum will address voluntarism, philanthropy and the nonprofit sector not as proprietary functions but as public ~oods, which broadly affect the state's economy, polity and quality of life, and which therefore merit careful analysis and planning, human resource and organizational development, informed public discussion and policy-development, and dependable support. " ... Toward that end, the MNF will promote dialogue, cooperation and collaboration across fields (health, human services, arts and humanities, community development, education, religion) and economic sectors (nonprofit, for-profit and public) to address mutual problems, strengthen the sector as a whole, and raise public awareness and recognition of the nonprofit sector's role and significant contributions in Michigan." (1990 Proposal to the Kellogg Foundation, pp. 2-3) As originally conceived, MNF would operate with minimal staff (an executive and a secretary) and maximum participation by organizations and individuals on issues of shared concern. Mission Areas and Proposed Activities. Within MNF' s broad mission, the founders included four broad areas for collaborative action: 1. To promote public awareness and understanding of Michigan's nonprofit sector: what it is, how it functions, and what part it plays in communities and the state. 2. To promote the effectiveness of the sector. 3. To advance the cause of voluntarism in the state. 4. To advance the cause of philanthropy in the state. 2 �The founders' deliberations recognized that a wide array of activities were already underway in Michigan to serve these broad goals, and that MNF would be "the new kid on the block," seeking to build bridges, identify common ground and overcome turf issues through mutual benefit. The founders also recognized that new and overlooked viewpoints must be included in the dialog to achieve new insight and effective action. To accomplish its mission, MNF would undertake activities in these areas: (A) Dialogue: "The Forum will regularly convene discussions among sector leaders and stakeholders on key and emerging issues . . . [to] serve both as a resource for understanding and a catalyst for further action. Further, through cooperation with existing networks, ... the Forum will promote dialogue throughout all levels of the sector, in order to raise the quality and extent of local discussion and informed action in the state as a whole." (B) Infonnation Sharine and Research: "The Forum will compile and disseminate current information and insights ... [and] serve as a responsive clearinghouse of information on the sector -- including an interactive computer network with hubs across the state -- ... raising awareness and understanding of emerging issues. . .. The Forum will also work to strengthen the network among Michigan scholars ... [to] promote collaborative analysis and broader reporting on the role, diversity, capacity and impact of the nonprofit sector in Michigan." (C) Public Policy Infonnation: "In addition to its broader informationsharing function, the MNF will have a particular emphasis on stimulating greater awareness and understanding of public policy issues that effect the sector as a whole. . .. [T]he MNF will become a hub for gathering and disseminating critical information on sector-wide issues of common concern, and for promoting broader dialogue and understanding. " (D) Capacity-Buildine: "[T]hrough its member organizations and others throughout the state, MNF will identify existing in-state resources for technical assistance and for education in philanthropy and voluntarism, as well as existing areas of need and interest in the state ... [in order to] increase awareness of [existing] resources and serve as a catalyst for collaborative planning and action [for unmet needs and underserved regions]." (E) Annual Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar: "As a centerpiece for its work, MNF will ... bring the sector's stakeholders together for day long presentations and discussions .... " (1990 Proposal, pp. 4-5) In its first year, MNF would make progress in each of these areas, as part of an overall strategy to create the alliance by demonstrating its worth. define it by principled experience and example. then recruit from its success. 3 �ill. FirSt-Year Proems In its first year, the MNF board has successfully created a working organization to serve its shared agenda. Under the board's leadership and with the support of the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, MNF conducted programs and created an operating framework of broad-based input and deliberations. From this strong beginning, MNF is already preparing to take on some of the largest, most complex issues facing the sector in its second year. A. Dialowe. MNF founders sought to create a mechanism for achieving shared understandings and collaborative action across Michigan's nonprofit sector. In MNF' s original design, dialogue was both a goal in itself, and also a means for refining MNF's continuing mission and timely objectives. In its first year, MNF successfully convened key leaders and conducted action-oriented discussions on a wide range of topics, testing out the strategy's viability and usefulness in a variety of settings. To begin, MNF's first board meeting was structured as a forum, with representative small groups (each a cross-section of the sector) identifying top priority issues facing the sector. MNF's thirty-seven Trustees, consisting of voluntary and professional leadership from across the sector, thus defmed MNF's first action framework (appended). In the months that followed, many of those action plans were implemented. In particular, the issue of voluntarism became an organizing theme for a series of forums leading to a statewide Campaign for Voluntarism (to begin at the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar IV on April24, 1992). Three forums were held (December 20, March 18 and April 11), bringing together leaders from thirty-seven statewide organizations involved with voluntarism (roster appended). As a result, a comprehensive Michigan Campaign for Voluntarism has been designed, with commitments by each of the participating organizations to conduct related activities (design appended). In addition, an article was produced by one participating organization, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, and distributed to its 37,000 subscribers statewide. Other dissemination plans are being developed by several others, including the Michigan Association of Volunteer Administrators, the Michigan School Volunteer Programs, the Michigan Society of Association Executives. and the Michigan Association of Broadcasters. In addition, MNF conducted two public policy meetings (Apri14, April 26), bringing together nonprofit and civic leaders in MNF's Public Policy Committee to discuss pressing public policy issues affecting the sector. These discussions resulted in a framework for collective deliberation, an agenda of top priority issues for further exploration, and three position statements on critical issues, subsequently adopted by the MNF board (discussed further in section C below). The 1990-91 planning committee for the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar also produced cross-sector dialogue and insight. The GGS Planning Committee was structured to convene funders and fundseekers from diverse fields, to plan a statewide conference to benefit the nonprofit community as a whole. As a result of these planning meetings (August 7, October 2 and February 11), committee leadership recognized that this committee -- in 4 �addition to producing the annual GGS Seminar -- itself exemplifies the Forum's mission and represents a continuing opportunity to build alliances and achieve mutual understanding on difficult issues. The 1991-92 Committee has been structured with this in mind: that it represents a special kind of forum and a continuing opportunity to advance the field. MNF also conducted several smaller, more specialized or localized forums, consistent with its original design. For example, because of interest in MNF's work on voluntarism, a group of nonprofit leaders in Big Rapids convened a group of 13 professionals to meet with MNF staff, to explore ways to participate in the statewide initiative to start new Voluntary Action Centers (VACs). Similar meetings were held in Holland, Adrian, Traverse City, Muskegon, and two in Alma. These local planning efforts are self-sustaining, assisted by the new state network, Volunteer Centers of Michigan. MNF also conducted local discussions as part of five workshops in June (in Jackson, Lansing, Kalamazoo, Grand Rapids and Traverse City) co-sponsored with the Foundation for American Communications, on media relations for nonprofits. MNF led luncheon discussions among the 50 to 80 participants, focussing on critical issues, perceived needs, and potential follow-up activities. Based on those discussions, plans are now being developed for self-sustaining networks of nonprofit communicators. In late spring, MNF joined with the Council of Michigan Foundations and other partners to produce a series of three planning meetings for a statewide Youth Service Michigan plan. MNF had initiated related discussions among educators and MNF trustees in the late fall and winter, in response to the National and Community Service Act passed by Congress in October 1990. Others also recognized this important opportunity for Michigan, so a natural alliance was created in the spring to produce a plan to position Michigan for the national competition for funding. MNF' s major contribution was enlisting its Organizational Members in the planning process, and alerting its networks including nearly 3,000 professionals and citizens, who responded enthusiastically to the opportunity to participate in the planning process (primarily through letters and calls). The three planning forums involved nearly 100 Michigan leaders in the formal planning process. Resulting recommendations are now before the Governor, who is forming a Governor's Commission on Youth Service Michigan to complete and submit the plan to Washington for potential funding. B. Infonnation Sharing. MNF founders also sought to create a hub for the exchange of information on the sector. The original design included (1) creation of a distribution system -- through existing networks as well as new avenues -- to circulate information on critical issues relating to the four mission areas; (2) a responsive "clearinghouse" function on timely issues; (3) stimulation and then dissemination of new research on the sector in Michigan; and (4) creation of a computerized bulletin board, to make information easily accessible across the state. In its first year, MNF made significant progress in all four areas. B-1: Distribution System. In the course of the year, MNF has identified 296 network organizations (in addition to Organizational Members) which relate to the nonprofit 5 �sector. These range widely from Volunteer Centers which serve individual communities of nonprofits, to statewide organizations like the Michigan Orchestra Association. In some cases, these networks publish information received from MNF in their newsletters; in others, the organizations have included our information in other communications with members. In addition, MNF has compiled a growing database of over 4200 nonprofits and related organizations, segmented so that mailings can be carefully targeted to particular audiences. (We anticipate that the database will double in 1991-92, based on lists now identified.) For example, four mailings reported on the work of MNF's Michigan Volunteer Coalition and plans for Youth Service Michigan - targeted to youth-serving and educational organizations, as well as to organizations that could serve as strong partners in comprehensive youth community service designs, such as United Ways and Urban Leagues (copy of the 6/18 letter attached). Smaller mailings reported regionally on training opportunities, such as the low-cost workshop on "Nonprofit Corporations and the Law" conducted by the Howell Chamber of Commerce Oetter attached). Copies of useful research were distributed, primarily to MNF Organizational Members for their use and distribution (cover letter for the impact survey of state budget cutbacks on the arts attached). Plans for 1991-92 include formalizing these communication systems into newsletters and Issue Papers, mailed to those who join as subscribers and members as well as those in strategic networks. Plans also include shifting most (not all) dissemination to the Computer Bulletin Board as this becomes feasible (discussed below). B-2: Clearinghouse Function. As MNF has become more widely known, calls have increased requesting a wide range of information. In some cases, calls relate to MNF mailings -- for example, scores of calls resulted from the mailings on the Youth Service Michigan plan. Others fall in these general categories: media inquiries, requests for demographic information on the sector, requests which result in referrals to specific nonprofit agencies, requests for funding information or technical assistance, and general requests concerning employment in the sector. With the assistance of our evaluation advisors, we have designed a form to capture details of these requests, to track the growth and usefulness of this function. Plans also include creation of various Information Sheets responding to common inquiries. During the first eight months, MNF staff made presentations to groups throughout the state, such as to the regional meetings of the Michigan Association of School Boards and the United Way of Michigan, and to statewide meetings of the Michigan Association of School Administrators and denominational leaders convened by the Michigan Ecumenical Forum. More recently, presentations have been made to non-board organizations, such as the Flint association of volunteer administrators, the state association of animal advocates, the Michigan Campus Compact, the Volunteer Centers of Michigan, the Accounting Aid Society, the Calhoun County elected officials (convened by their state legislator), the American Association of University Women, and the Social Science Research Bureau conference on "Privatization of Public Services." 6 �MNF staff also have increasingly been identified as resources for sharing information and for assisting access to statewide networks -- for example, to assist the "Funding Fundraising" initiative by the National Society of Fundraising Executives, and the "Into the Streets" initiative for college student community service, conducted by the Campus Outreach Opportunity League. Also, the MNF Executive Director now serves as a member of the Policy Board of the Social Science Research Bureau. This kind of information dissemination also can serve as a catalyst for innovation or change. For example, as part of its efforts to assist the promotion of volunteering statewide, MNF reached out to networks of organizations (such as United Ways, Chambers of Commerce, and Cooperative Extension offices) in communities that lacked volunteer centers. As a result, 15 communities have been identified that show interest in starting up volunteer centers, including several communities (such as Big Rapids, Cadillac and Three Rivers) which were stimulated by MNF's inquiry. These communities have now been drawn into the loop of assistance that can be provided by strong, experienced Volunteer Centers through the Volunteer Centers of Michigan. Similarly, MNF has helped to spread interest in youth community service programs through its mailings. In the coming year, we will explore how best to be of assistance to this movement -- such as convening roundtables to consider curriculum innovations that incorporate community service, for possible wider implementation. Currently, MNF's database includes 1,324 persons whose work relates to youth or young adult community serv1ce. B-3: Research. MNF convened two scholars roundtables (one at Calvin College and one at the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar), to identify interest and promote greater attention to nonprofit research questions. Mailings continue to keep contact with interested scholars, and plans are underway to co-sponsor annual or semi-annual roundtables with the Nonprofit Michigan Project at Michigan State University. In addition, MNF has served in an advisory role to several colleges considering or developing academic programs on the nonprofit sector, including Michigan State University (the MNF Executive Director is a member of their Third Sector Planning Committee), Grand Valley State University, and Calvin College. MNF staff also work closely with the Nonprofit Michigan Project, which will share a student intern in 1991-92. Plans for 1991-92 include developing MNF's ability to serve as a utility for scholars and nonprofit professionals, by (a) disseminating research insights, (b) communicating practitioners' concerns in the form of valid research questions, and (c) providing access to sectorwide data collection for scholars. This will be discussed at the Scholars Roundtables as well as in MNF's policy and program committees. B-4: Computer Bulletin Board. As committed in the proposal, a Computer Bulletin Board has been created within the Michigan Community College Association's system. However, the work of making that system functional and actually used by the nonprofit community still remains. 7 �The original plan called for "hubs" around the state, which would receive MNF information for further, local dissemination, and which would relay local information for statewide dissemination. This has, in fact, been the MNF operating design, using the mail and telephone. However, the leap to a computer network has been delayed, for several reasons: -- Few nonprofits are in the habit of using computer systems for communications, in contrast to word processing or data manipulation. --Although the concept of serving as a "hub" has been discussed with several networks, actual translation of that general idea into practice will require close working relationships and experimentation, including significant staff time. -- The collection of quantities of timely information represents a logistical problem that is only beginning to be addressed. It will take both numerous interns and many willing nonprofit professionals. This is a challenge that still lies ahead. When this problem frrst became apparent early in 1991, MNF submitted a proposal to the Union Institute for a small grant for a temporary staff person to address it (attached). The grant was not approved, so the problem of staff time remains the primary obstacle. C. Public Policy Infonnation. The MNF founders saw a special opportunity for MNF in the area of public policy. On cross-sector issues, areas of common concern to all parts of the nonprofit sector, they proposed to create a mechanism for achieving common understandings and developing action strategies. In its frrst year, MNF initiated sector-wide consideration of public policy issues and made important contributions to the state and national debate. For example, the overarching theme of the Public Policy Committee meetings was that lack of public understanding -- both of legislators and the voters -- about What is the nonprofit sector, Why do we have it, What does it do, How does it fit into the puzzle of government and private sector services, and Why is it worthy of our continued support? As a result, two major recommendations of the Public Policy Committee have resulted in progress toward a MNF White Paper on the nonprofit sector, and the first of a possible series of taped Summits on the issues, bringing together leaders from government, business and the nonprofit sector (committee roster appended). In addition, the Public Policy Committee deliberated on several critical policy issues, resulting in three Position Statements (later approved by the Board of Trustees) concerning: (1) the proposed increase in the nonprofit postal rate; (2) erosion of the charitable tax deduction at the federal level; and (3) the new accounting standards proposed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (attached). As a result, MNF alerted network agencies throughout the state, as well as key legislators and agencies at the state and national levels. 8 �In 1991-92, MNF will formalize this information exchange, by identifying a network of contacts at each Organizational Member and network agency, and by producing Public Policy Alerts/Updates on an irregular basis. A column in the newsletter will be devoted to these issues as well. In addition, the Public Policy Committee meetings, which represent cross-sector gatherings of concerned leaders, will be developed further as informational forums, possibly with outside speakers/resource persons on tough issues. D. Capacity-Buildin&. MNF founders did not originally intend to create a large, staffed organization that would provide extensive direct training and assistance to nonprofit organizations. Instead, MNF would identify existing opportunities for professional development and assistance, and serve as an information clearinghouse, a catalyst for expanded assistance, and a mechanism for joint planning. In its first year, MNF established itself as an information resource and as a vehicle for collaboration to improve the capacity of the sector. MNF contacted universities and groups currently providing training, as well as colleges considering programs to serve the nonprofit sector. In this work, MNF was guided by the statewide survey completed by the Council of Michigan Foundations through its Improving Philanthropy Project, which identified educational programs in philanthropy currently being conducted in Michigan colleges and universities. MNF currently has identified 135 researchers and 125 educators interested in the nonprofit sector as a field of study. As a result, MNF has collaborated with several providers -- such as the Accounting Aid Society and Michigan State University-- in the design and implementation of training programs, and plans are under discussion for more. MNF has also disseminated information on training opportunities, although this function awaits the completion of the computer bulletin board for full development. MNF collected information on needs from GGS participants in 1990 and 1991, and other needs assessments from around the state are being gathered (soon on a systematic basis, using a student intern). In the coming year, this information will form the basis of a Providers Roundtable (hopefully an ongoing planning network), so that nonprofits can receive quality assistance regardless of geographic location. In addition, MNF has been working with the Accounting Aid Society to update its catalog of professionals providing technical services to nonprofits. With the help of a student intern this fall and winter, the updated text should be available by spring. MNF has also advised several communities on conferences and workshops for nonprofits, such as the Jackson Community Foundation and the School of Public Administration at Grand Valley State University. Because it represents a nexus of information, MNF can usually provide names of experts in a wide range of fields. This seems to be a useful service, so plans are underway to compile lists for easy reference on a variety of topics. 9 �E. Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar. With considerable growth over three years, the 1991 GG Seminar was conducted on May 10, 1991 and attended by 1,260 professionals: Health & Human Services NSFRE Higher Education K-12 Arts Priv/Comm/Corp Funders Religion Government United Ways Other 40% 21% 11% 8% 8% 6% 5% 4% 1% 13% GGill established MNF as the sponsor of this event (previously sponsored by the Council of Michigan Foundations), and gave MNF high visibility-- even providing the debut for the MNF videotape, shown at the Speakers Dinner on May 9 and at the luncheon on May 10. Participants gave the entire program high ratings, even finding GGill less impersonal that the smaller GGII! (committee roster and program attached) The GG Seminar is much more than a free-standing event. It represents a major opportunity-- both through its planning process and at the event itself-- to advance MNF's mission of achieving a cohesive community of stakeholders in the nonprofit sector. The Seminar can draw from and build on MNF's work throughout the year; the Seminar can also inform MNF's mission in the subsequent year. Thus MNF's sponsorship represents a special challenge to the Planning Committee for GGIV, scheduled for April24, 1992. F. Start-up Functions. In addition to the five activity areas described above, a major challenge for MNF's leaders was to create an operating alliance, capable of executing collaborative activities through networks, with minimal MNF staff. In its first year, all the major organizational components have been developed, and the organization is fully operational ((501(c)(3) authorization still pending). F-1: Governance: Because of its unique collaborative structure and purposes, MNF' s governance was a special challenge. MNF Steering Committee members formed a task force in July to formulate by-laws-- adopted in October and amended in May-- that define a governing board and expanded membership, as well as inclusive committees which draw widely from Michigan's nonprofit sector to define current programs and future directions. The goal of the founding members was to keep the governing board small enough for effective deliberations, yet to keep MNF's leading edges-- its program and policy committees -- as broadly inclusive as possible. They accomplished this FIRST by limiting board membership to no more than 20 statewide networks of nonprofits (such as the United Way of Michigan and the Michigan League for Human Services), plus 5 smaller or more 10 �specialized networks of nonprofits (such as the Michigan Orchestra Association or the Flint Council of Churches), plus 5 At-Large Members with statewide prominence in the nonprofit sector. The governing board is explicitly designed to bring diverse voices to the table, representing as broad and rich a cross-section of Michigan's nonprofit sector as possible. SECOND, the founding members defmed MNF's operating committees as inclusive-that is, those committees explicitly seek diverse representation from interested stakeholders across the state. The Program Committee, Public Policy Committee and Grantmakers/Grantseekers Program Committee are examples. F-2: F.stablishine an Office and Staff: Although it serves as an alliance, MNF must also operate as a well-managed and accountable organization. For this purpose, the Steering Committee engaged an Acting Executive Director on June 1, 1990, who established an office under the auspices of the United Way of Michigan. After an extensive search, MNF leaders hired Maryellen Lewis as Executive Director on November 1, 1990, who hired an Administrative Secretary. Based on the experience of the first year, on May 9, 1991 MNF leaders approved the creation of an administrative assistant position for Year 2 (after discussion with the W.K. Kellogg Foundation). F-3: Student Internships: MNF has engaged its first two student interns this fall. Previously, both space and staff time represented unresolved obstacles to adding student interns to the office operations. During its first seven months, MNF operated out of a single office with two desks, contributed by the United Way of Michigan. In January, MNF moved into temporary space in the Kellogg Center at Michigan State University, at first with only a two and then a three month agreement. At that time, staff took on several new responsibilities, including bookkeeping, accounting, purchasing and other financial management services previously provided by the United Way of Michigan. So until recently, the recruitment, deployment and supervision of student interns remained undeveloped. Nonetheless, MNF developed relationships with several colleges, including Michigan State University, Lansing Community College and Cooley Law School, which will result in both volunteer and paid student internships in 1991-92. Job descriptions for student projects have already been drafted, and plans for supervision are being outlined. Two student interns begin on October 1, 1991. F-4: Evaluation. The MNF executive has been working with three evaluation advisors from Michigan State University: Dr. Christopher Clark, chairman of educational administration, Dr. Frank Fear, chairman of community development, and Dr. Mary Andrews, associate dean of human ecology. Based on their advice, preliminary systems have been developed to track MNF operations, and a process evaluation plan is being developed by Dr. Clark. On their advice, a graduate student was sought to work with them but were unsuccessful last spring. Since no funds were expended on evaluation in 1990-91 and rollover of all funds has been approved, a major evaluation design will be possible in 1991-92. 11 �IV. Future Plans - Year 2 As part of its planning for the fall meeting of the Trustees, the MNF Executive Committee will review and set priorities for 1991-92 (and set the stage for 1992-93) at its October 8 meeting. For this purpose, a preliminary list of goals was distributed for review at the August 6 Executive Committee meeting, including these: Promms to Develop 1. Strengthen MNF's capacity to respond and even take leadership on public policy issues (such as liability issues). 2. Continue the Grantmakers/Grantseekers series, incorporating it as an integral part of MNF' s ongoing work. 3. Begin a series of fonnal MNF-sponsored Summits/Public Policy Forums on critical issues (one or two per year). 4. Kick off the Michigan Campaign for Voluntarism. 5. Lay groundwork for a statewide "Give 5" campaign, sequenced to begin Spring 1993 (perhaps at Grantmakers/Grantseekers V), in cooperation with the Council of Michigan Foundations and the United Way of Michigan, and others. 6. In cooperation with MSU' s Nonprofit Michigan Project, conduct an annual/semi-annual Scholars Roundtable and disseminate research on the nonprofit sector as tools for practitioners. 7. Assist better communication among providers of training and technical assistance to nonprofits, for joint planning and more comprehensive services to all regions. 8. Fonnalize MNF publications and dissemination networks. 9. Implement the Computer Bulletin Board. Services to Develop 1. Increase capacity to collect and share infonnation. 2. Increase capacity to convene stakeholders for dialogue and collaboration. 3. Produce "Issue Papers," such as the White Paper proposed by the Public Policy Committee. Administrative Goals 1. Develop membership base and services. 2. Implement Finance Committee's design for alternative funding sources, beginning in the second year (appended). 3. Increase involvement of student interns. 4. Implement the formal evaluation, and incorporate into Board planning process. V. Dissemination In its first year, MNF shared infonnation about its work through several national networks. As a member of the National Council of Nonprofit Associations, MNF 12 �communicates with existing and emerging state associations of nonprofits, at conferences and through the mail and phone. As a member of the Independent Sector, MNF has access to a much larger network of stakeholders, and has participated in the national dialogue at conferences and regular telephone communication (particularly about pressing national public policy issues such as the postal rate). MNF has also participated in the national "Into the Streets" initiative for college student community service, and continues to communicate with individuals from other regions about college/nonprofit agency partnerships. Outside of Michigan, several aspects of MNF's experience have gained attention and may be useful elsewhere. For example, the Michigan alliance appears to be unique in at least three ways: -- MNF includes funders as partners -- MNF includes educators as partners -- MNF includes religious organizations as partners Plans for sharing this kind of information remain informal, in much the same way as other states share information with us. This seems to be the most appropriate and effective means of dissemination at the moment. Eventually, articles will be prepared for publication, but perhaps not during the second year. 13 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_1991-Annual-Progress-Report_WK-Kellogg Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1991 Annual Progress Report WK Kellogg Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1991 Annual Progress Report WK Kellogg. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49458 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/065aa28f054c801e432fef8c1f35fa9d.pdf a30614b3fdaa1967fb2e43e08a71f3a5 PDF Text Text Michigan Nonprofit Forum Evaluation Report July 1992 Prepared by: Christopher M. Clark �Michigan Nonprofit Forum Evaluation Report Christopher M. Clark Introduction I am here today to tell you a story. It is a story of people and ideas, hopes and concerns, and about your vision of a stronger nonprofit sector for Michigan. In a sense, I have become a biographer of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum, or a portrait artist, trying to capture a faithful likeness. I hope that you recognize the Forum in this story. I mean the word "recognize" in two senses: first, that you agree that my representation appears fair and faithful to your own images of the Forum; and second, that this evaluation report moves you to think differently about, to re cognize the Forum, in the service of a collective and evolving vision of what the Forum will become. In other words, this is your story, with a beginning and a middle, to which you get to add and enact the continuing chapters. Evaluation Approach This is a somewhat unconventional approach to evaluation. Classic program and project evaluation designs evolved from behavioral science approaches to research on schooling and industrial psychologists' ways of describing and analyzing factory production systems. In both traditions, the heart of the evaluation process is definition and measurement of input variables and output variables. The underlying metaphor is that of an efficiently operating, well designed machine. When output was judged to be at favorable levels of quantity and quality, with acceptable and sustainable levels of input, the evaluation was favorable. But when the system was found to be burning too much oil or producing graduates who could not read, the evaluation could lead to suggestions for redesign or even scrapping the system. For several reasons, this classic approach did not seem to be a good match for evaluation of the Forum. The Michigan Nonprofit Forum does not fit comfortably into the factory metaphor. The Forum is not a production system, any more than a family is, or a good conversation among friends. Now, I suppose that an economist could force the family into a factory, model, producing wage earners, tax payers, and consumers. But when I imagine a particularly family, say, my family, evaluated in this way, the model misses the mark. The essence of a family or a conversation or of the Forum is badly distorted or lost entirely by reducing it to a list of inputs and outputs. Coming to an understanding of the Forum presented me with special challenges. The Forum is busy inventing itself as it goes. It is a dynamic set of ideas, people, activities and relationships. Its history is brief, and there were no prior examples of evaluation for me to follow. Much of the Forum's mission is rather abstract and invisible. Its members are strong, intelligent, busy, diverse, and all accustomed to being in charge. And the Fourm is hardly anyone's full time preoccupation. These qualities make evaluation challenging and they make evaluation interesting. So what I have done is to assemble a portrait of the first years of the Michigan Nonprofit �Forum, using your words and images to describe and take the vital signs of the organization. These words come from my synthesis of fifteen interviews of past and present Trustees and committee members and of the returns from a mail survey sent to forty members and interested and knowledgable parties. Basically, I asked five questions in the interviews and survey—questions about the historical past, the present, and about the possible futures of the Forum. In listening to you, and in assembling this mosaic, I have learned much more than the answers to these five questions. Thank you again for your frankness, patience, and generosity with your time. I hope that what I give back to you here provides both satisfaction and food for thought and deliberation as the Forum moves into its critical third year. Results Before I report the details of your answers to the five big evaluation questions let me briefly sketch my overall impression of the state of the Forum. The Forum is a good idea whose time has come. As one of the founding members said, "If the Forum closed down today, it would have to be reinvented tomorrow." For many long time laborers and leaders in the nonprofit sector, the cross-sector connections, conversations and projects are a breath of fresh air and offer the promise of solidarity at a time when we need all the mutual support we can provide one another. Many of you are impressed with how much the Forum has accomplished in its first two years. I also heard some concern that these first years may be a hard act to follow, because our small and dedicated staff and a few key committee chairs have been working at a pace that may be unreasonable to sustain. For this reason and others, many of you see the Forum at a crucial juncture. The time of getting organized and the excitement of doing something novel should now yeild to a period of sharper focus on doing a few things well, on expanding Forum membership and assistance to more local levels, and on securing continuing financial support from multiple sources. The membership seems genuinely proud to be connected with the Forum and also concerned about the challenges to achieving a balance that can be sustained for the long term. Question 1. Have we actually created a Michigan Nonprofit Forum? To what extent does it live up to our original hopes and vision? The first part of this question is easy to answer "yes." The Michigan Nonprofit Forum does indeed exist. The Forum has a staff, an office, a letterhead, a budget, a newsletter, and a telephone. The Forum has members and Trustees and committees who meet and deliberate and act and decide and, by and large, are pleased that the Forum exists, and proud that Michigan is the first state to create such an organization. The Forum has sponsored important activities like the Summit that would not otherwise have happened, and has become a key partner in other activities valuable to the nonprofit sector such as the Grantmakers-Grantseekers Seminars and the Campaign for Volunteerism. To what extent does the Forum live up to the hopes and visions of four or five years ago, when it was a new idea emerging from conversations among a handful of visionaries? The answer is mixed. Most whom I interviewed are amazed at how much the Forum has accomplished in the last two years. Often people cited the Summit as a first class event, where people who would not usually find themselves in the same company came together to listen, to teach, to learn about the importance, scale, and diversity of the nonprofit sector in Michigan. Introductions made at the Summit and at other Forum-sponsored events have grown into personal and institutional connections of mutual benefit. And research on the identity and dynamics of the nonprofit sector in Michigan and nationally has begun and is now being �disseminated. All of these examples of communication, education, networking, research, and pursuit of common interests were certainly important in the founders' hopes for the Forum. But there are also ways that the Forum, as it has come to be, differs from the original vision. Things often take longer than we imagine they should, and the Forum has taken longer to reach today's state of organization than originally pictured. There is a delicate balancing act involved in operating an exciting and ambitious volunteer organization with a very small staff. Forum members have come up with many more good ideas than can be acted on immediatly. It is a good thing that the Forum functions as an incubator of ideas. But it can also be frustrating when we have more good ideas than we can complete. For example, it was easy to agree that the Forum should produce a White Paper on the nonprofit sector in Michigan. It has been much more difficult and time consuming to figure out how to focus it, who should draft it, how detailed it should be, who the intended audiences are, and when and how it will actually appear. The case is similar with the videotapes recorded during the Summit. Moving from hours of recordings to one or more condensed, targeted video productions is more expensive, complex and time consuming than anyone expected. Over and over again, in different ways, interviewees said that now is the time for the Forum to focus on doing a few things very well. One described the Forum as being at the adolescent stage of life. We have tried a wide variety of experiences. Now it is time to assess our short history and be clear with ourselves about which three or four initiatives we have the time, energy, and capacity to do best. No one ventured to spell out exactly what these three or four key activities should be. But some of the nominated features of candidate core activities are that they be pursued in a first class manner by a combination of staff and member time and resources; that they have specific and measurable outcomes within a year or two; and that at least some of these core activities be of direct and obvious benefit to local grass roots parts of the nonprofit sector (e.g., local school boards, county United Way directors, community volunteer centers). Question 2. In what ways are the key activities of the MNF consistent with our Guiding Principles? 1. 2. 3. 4. Encouraging voluntary giving and service Promoting constructive dialogue Research and self-examination Establishing high standards of ethics, efficiency and accountability 5. Promoting positive public policies and incentives for the nonprofit sector, including tax exemption A general summary of responses to this question is quite positive: the activities and Forum initiatives of the past two years are seen as consistent with the five Guiding Principles adopted by the Trustees. Several respondents expressed delight in the fact that they could think of Forum activities that reflected each of these principles, a pleasantly surprising record given our short history. One trustee noted that, in hindsight, it was wise to frame and adopt these Guiding Principles after the Forum had a year or so to sort itself out. A broad and inspiring vision and mission statement was useful in rallying initial support for the Forum as an idea. After a year of trying to operationalize the vision it was timely to set forth a more specific set �of principles that speak to what we found to be common ground. The Guiding Principles set boundaries on Forum activities, present and future. They remind us of our priorities and, by omission, of what we have decided not to do. More than one respondent suggested that the Guiding Principles could be used as a framework for reports to the Executive Committee about Forum initiatives and accomplishments. This format, in turn, could be used by Trustees and others to inform their own boards of directors and members about the good work and benefits of Forum membership. Voluntary Giving and Service Looking at the five Guiding Principles one at a time, the concensus is that the Forum has accomplished the most in relation to the first two: encouraging voluntary giving and service, and promoting constructive dialogue. Our credits for promoting voluntary giving and service come mostly from Forum affiliation with and support of Governor Romney's Campaign for Volunteerism and the Give 5 Program. Together, Forum involvement in these activities has taken an estimated 25% of staff time and energy, to give you a sense of the scale of our commitment here. Maryelten Lewis was also instrumental in helping make a connection between the Michigan Association of School Boards' resolution encouraging a service option for high school students and the expertise of the Michigan Volunteer Centers to assist local school authorities. This is a good example of how the Forum can work as a linking agent, making alliances for the mutual benefit of organizations that otherwise would not have realized an opportunity. Constructive Dialogue Promoting constructive dialogue within the nonprofit sector is for many the signature activity of the Forum. The word "networking" was mentioned often as a primary benefit of Forum membership. Forum participants report having met and learned from others whom they likely would not have encountered in their typical patterns of educators talking to educators, church people meeting with other church people, and so forth. Once initial contacts have been made through Forum events and committees, members have felt free to call one another in pursuit of common interests and projects. In this sense, the Forum has worked well in moving interesting people out from behind their habits of mind and routines to discover one another and to form new professional friendships and connections. Because there was no other available way to do this and because many members felt somewhat isolated in their work, this was singled out as a highly successful part of the Forum's program. But it is worth noting that a few participants also took a critical view of constructive dialogue. Opening new lines of communication has been a good thing, but some of the conversants are perceived as shaping the conversation more than others and in ways that guard their own organization's interests, i hasten to add that these friendly critics are not imputing selfish motives to particular Forum members. Rather, they are trying to explain the structural features of the Forum that may place constraints on its agenda. Finding common ground is both hard and delicate work. Research and Self-Examination The Summit received high marks for many reasons: the wide range of Michigan sectors and interests represented, the honesty and openness of the participants, the sophistication of the �technical arrangements, and the polish of Ed Blews as master of ceremonies. The Summit also brought us into contact with research on the nonprofit sector in Michigan and nationally, and continued our professional education about the scope, heterogeneity, and challenges of the nonprofit sector. Respondents were enthusiastic about the beginnings of newly specific definitions of the "third sector" and the marshalling of evidence by Mark Wilson, Robert L Payton and others useful in convincing government, business, and the public of the vital importance of supporting the nonprofit sector. At the same time, the research reported at the Summit was seen as but a promising beginning. The developing Scholars Network and the planned Nonprofit Research Conference in December are encouraging examples of how the Forum will continue to promote inquiry about the nonprofit sector in Michigan. Promoting High Standards There is no doubt about the Forum's commitment to promoting high standards of ethics, efficiency and accountability in the Michigan nonprofit sector. There is also no doubt that these matters will take on increasing importance and sensitivity in the coming months and years. The more successful we are in public education about the size and importance of the nonprofit sector the more subject we become to public and political scrutiny and regulation. If we do not articulately regulate ourselves, others will be glad to do it for us. To date, the Forum has flagged the standards issue as important and proposed that the next Summit take accountability as its theme. The proposed White Paper and a draft Code of Ethics for the nonprofit sector hold promise as contributions to high standards. But it is too soon to tell how strong the Forum's contributions in this domain will be. Positive Public Policies The Forum Program Committee and Public Policy Committee are the sources of most of our work to date on promoting positive public policies and incentives for the nonprofit sector, including tax exemption. These have been strong committees and a major agenda item has been the tax credit issue. In late June the Forum sent an alert to members urging them to contact the Michigan Congressional Delegation in connection with pending federal legislation on gifts of appreciated property. Resisting postal rate increases and potentially onerous new accounting standards drafted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board are also important priorities addressed by these combined committees. The Forum has also received a small grant to find out what other states are doing with regard to nonprofit sector advocacy. The general view among members surveyed is that the Forum has made some promising first steps in promoting positive public policies, but that it is too soon to tell how influential the Forum can be in this domain. Question 3. How has the MNF increased a sense of community within the Michigan nonprofit sector? Many of the issues raised earlier under the heading of "constructive dialogue" were echoed in connection with the Forum's role in promoting a sense of community within the nonprofit sector. Members are pleased to have met and connected with individuals, organizations and causes farther afield than they otherwise would have. Board and committee members who are relatively new to Michigan or to their organizational roles expressed special gratitude to the Forum for bringing them up to speed quickly about the Michigan nonprofit scene. And long time veterans in the nonprofit sector are pleased that, at long last, we are building an infrastructure 6 �for much needed communication, cooperation and coordination. As one veteran said, "Before the Forum our response to legislative developments was fragmentary and often too late to be effective. Now we are able to be more coordinated and proactive." Members of Forum committees expressed delight with the professionalism and energy of fellow committee members and staff. The design of the Forum, with a very small staff, makes it necessary that the Board and committee members do the lion's share of the work, and this has indeed been happening. A sense of community comes from working hard together on common tasks, as Sister Monica reminded me. The Forum office is coming into its own as a source of information about nonprofits. The staff has been responding to 12-15 telephone calls each month in its Nonprofit Information Clearinghouse role, on questions as diverse as how to set up a new nonprofit, personnel policies for nonprofits, training available, state sales tax regulations for church rummage sales, fundraising opportunities, and where to get help recruiting volunteers for the Michigan State Fair. In addition to providing helpful information and referrals, the staff adds inquirers to the Forum mailing list and data base, broadening the statewide nonprofit network. The expressed concern about the Forum's first years in promoting a sense of community have to do with the scope and constituency of the community. Some feel strongly that the next stage of nonprofit sector community building should involve much more attention to including local and county level agencies and actors. The danger, they warn, is that the Forum may be perceived as an exclusive club for state level nonprofit executives that has little to offer locally. At the same time, others urge that we should not allow the Forum to get much bigger because it is challenging enought to sustain a sense of partnership and connection among the present membership. The issue boils down to finding a balanced way to provide intellectual, moral, and practical support for the whole nonprofit sector in Michigan, while avoiding inefficient duplication of services or exhaustion of our staff and working committee members. This presents a classic dilemma, in which two desirable goals compete, and brings us back to the issue of focus. When the Forum Executive Committee charts a course for the next year or two, the question of the size, shape, and membership of the community we hope to affect ought to be debated quite explicitly, for mafiy other decisions are shaped and constrained by this fundamental one. Question 4. To what degree have the activities of the MNF increased awareness and support of the nonprofit sector in Michigan? Increased awareness and support for the nonprofit sector in Michigan are attributed primarily to the Summit and to Forum involvement in the Campaign for Volunteerism. Participating legislators and business people reported being quite impressed with what they had learned about the nonprofit sector at the Summit. In connection with the Campaign for Volunteerism, Maryellen Lewis has travelled and met with representatives and boards of many organizations outside the nonprofit sector, including the State Chamber of Commerce, Rotary Clubs, the Detroit Executive Service Corps, and the Ford Motor Company. Satisfying as these contributions to broader appreciation of the nonprofit sector are, they seem like a modest beginning with greater potential. For the first time, Michigan has a voice that speaks articulately for the nonprofit sector as a whole. The Forum is still learning how to use this voice to widen the circle of awareness and support for the nonprofit sector. The press seems generally not interested in featuring the nonprofit sector as news. This is an impediment to more direct public education about the sector that we have identified and begun to address �through a strong series of sessions at the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminars and through a planned series of conversations with media leaders in anticipation of Grantmakers/Grantseekers V. Question 5. To what extent is the Forum sustainable in its present form or in a revised configuration? When I asked the final question about how or whether the Forum can be sustained, I learned that leaders in the nonprofit sector can be at the same time optimistic and have furrowed brows. Virtually everyone said that the Forum can be sustained. No one said that it would be easy. And there was clear concensus that the coming year is a make or break time for lining up a basket of core financial support. As mentioned earlier, you are of two minds about expanding Forum membership to the 400 level that seems possible in Michigan. But even the most enthusiastic promoters of expansion do not think that the Forum can become a duessupported organization. One way or another, the core support for the Forum staff, office and so forth is seen as coming from one or a small number of foundation grants. Expanding the membership rolls is seen as important in persuading prospective funders of the wide scope of support that the Forum can provide in Michigan. A variation on the model of seeking multiple sources for core support is to pursue sponsors of particular Forum activities, like future Summits, the Forum publication and dissemination program, and Internships. We have had success in securing multi-source support for the Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminars and are pursuing corporate support as well. Several respondents revisited the themes of focus and practical service to local actors in the nonprofit sector when we discussed sustainability. To persuade ourselves, future members, and prospective financial backers of the long term worth of the Forum they urged concentration on two or three manifestly practical and locally beneficial projects. Examples of Forum activities already in the works that speak to this priority include a Resource Guide to technical and managements support and training for nonprofit managers being assembled for fall publication. The Calendar of Training Activities published in the first Newsletter received considerable favorable attention from local nonprofits. And we are also compiling a diredtory of current and emerging higher education programs for nonprofit managers and contributing to a national effort to assemble a battery of easy to use evaluation instruments for nonprofits. Another issue that arose in discussions of sustainability was regionalism. Lansing has been the geographic center of Forum activity, although we have active members as far west as Grand Haven and east to Flint and Detroit. Face to face dialogue is at the heart of Forum activity, yet it demands a great deal of busy people to spend much of a day on the road to attend a two-hour meeting. And this pattern makes it difficult for members and affiliates away from Lansing to feel the fullest sense of ownership and participation. Out of these discussions came ideas and encouragement for sponsoring regional conversations throughout the state. The present Forum could serve as a catalyst and a model for locally organized and sustained networks of mutual support, perhaps growing from community meetings for developing strategies to encourage volunteerism and regional meetings to view and respond to issues raised in the videos of the first Summit. 8 �Conclusions In conclusion, you have convinced me that the Michigan Nonprofit Forum is real, is a good idea in principle, and is an idea whose time has come. To date, you have told me, the promise of the Forum is still greater than its accomplishments. At the same time, our accomplishments are impressive, constructive, and consistent with our Guiding Principles. The highest form of compliment I heard was from Len Young. As he prepared to move to Kansas City, he told me that he intended to help create a Missouri Nonprofit Forum modelled after our own. Even the intitats will be the same. The Forum, fundamentally, is about relationships: Internal relationships among people representing very different kinds of nonprofit organizations in Michigan, and External relationships between the nonprofit sector and government, business, and the public. The word "forum" implies common ground—a democratic place where common interests can be explored and pursued; where each has a voice; a cooperative rather than a competitive space in which encouragement, information exchange, and collaborative connections are the order of the day. Forum founders and members believe that the work of their individual organizations is vital to a free and compassionate society. And they also feel a broader sense of responsibility to nurture the nonprofit sector as a whole; to make incidental connections stronger and to extend the network farther; to help the members feel part of a like-minded, highly principled community; to learn from the hard won experiences of others; and on occasion to speak and act with one strong voice on matters of common interest. In short, the aspirations for the Forum have to do with identity, mutual support, and common ground. In evaluating this first phase of the MNF we can ask whether the nonprofit sector in Michigan has a stronger, clearer identity today than two years ago, I think it has. We can be proud of instances of mutual support among members attributable to the Forum. And we can ask whether the Forum, through its varied activities, has helped to define common ground where mutual interests meet. This has begun to happen and, by your testimony, ought to be pursued even more urgently. The Executive Committee and the Board of Trustees have a set of vital decisions to confront: about membership, focus, financial support, and boundaries. The Forum is growing out of adolescence, and each of you has different ideas about what kind of adult it shall become. I hope my story helps to frame your conversation in a constructive light. I am eager to read your next chapter. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_1992-July-Evaluation-Report Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992 July Evaluation Report Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992 July Evaluation Report. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49716 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bfeba126fb4268387fb0936a2789bae4.pdf 54a998ae57f8d3ec832babb76c88ac99 PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION "An alliance to promote philanthropy, voluntarism, and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in the state." The Michigan Nonprofit Forum is a statewide alliance which serves as a clearinghouse for addressing issues of importance to the nonprofit sector. •It convenes groups of leaders to plan and act together. •ft works with policymakers, the public, and news media to promote a better understanding of how the nonprofit sector works and why it is so important •It issues periodic "public policy alerts" and position papers. •It convenes the annual Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar. •It holds biannual nonprofit public policy summits. •It promotes voluntarism throughout the state. •It stimulates and disseminates research on the nonprofit sector. •It publishes a timely newsletter focusing on nonprofit sector issues. Join now and receive a free copy of The State of Nonprofit Michigan 1991 and a free lifetime subscription to Community Jobs, a national listing of nonprofit jobs. For more information call; S17/3S3-S038. Please enroll me/my organization at an associate member of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. (SSO Membership include* discounts and reduced conference feet as well as the newsletter and Updates.) _I wish to support this important work with my contribution of $ •Honorary Donors $500 or more. •Sustaining Donors $250 - 499. •Sponsoring Donors $100 - 249. . _My organization is a network of people/agencies, and we want to become active in MNFs work. Please contact me with information about how we can join as NETWORK ASSOCIATES! Name Title/Position Organization Address City State Telephone FAX Enclosed is a check in the amount of $ Zip . Please make c^w^s payable to: Michigan Nonprofit Forum and mgij to: _^___ ___ MNF 34 Kellogg Center East Lansing, MI 48224-1022 �RESOURCES AVAILABLE FROM THE MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM Michigan Nonprofit Resource Directory, in collaboration with Accounting Aid Society (forthcoming) Amount of order MNF Issues Papers f$5.00 for members. $8.00 for nonmembersl #1 "Collaboration for a Shared Future," James A. Joseph, Council on Foundations. #2 Report from Policy Summit I, "Partnership for People and Progress: the Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Mi Government and Business Community". #3 'Living Our Mission: Meeting Our Publics' Needs," Children's Defense Fund. #4 "The Changing Face of Michigan's Nonprofit Sector: Lessons from New Research," Mark I. Wilson, Director, Nonprofit Michigan Project (forthcoming). #5 "Towarda Michigan White Paper on the Nonprofit Sector," Consultant Independent Sector. Marian Wright Edelman, President, Janne G. Gallagher, Audio Tapes ($9.00 for members. $12.00 for nonmembers) —.— "Collaboration fora Shared Future," James A. Joseph, President, Council on Foundations. "Demographics: Tools to Prepare for Michigan's Future Today," Harold (Bud) Hodgkinson, Director, Center for Demographic Policy, Institute for Educational Leadership. "Planning That Works: Long Range Strategic Planning for Nonprofits," Florence L. Green, President, Nonprofit Management Association and Bd Member, California Assn of Nonprofits. "Collaboration: Process and Pitfalls," Florence L. Green, President, Nonprofit Management Association and Board Member, California Association of Nonprofits. Audio tapes from the April 24. 1992 Grantmakers/Grantseekers Seminar ($9 each for members/$35 for five; $12 each for nonmembers/$50 for five) Opening Session: "Living Our Mission: Meeting Our Publics' Needs" -~ Marian Wright Edelman, President, Children's Defense Fund "Collaboration and Appropriate Mergers' - Florence Green, President, California Association of Nonprofits and Board Member, Nonprofit Management Association "Shaking the Money Tree: What Motivates the Large Gift?" -- Jerold Panas, CEO, Panas, Young & Partners, Inc. "Innovative Income Generation" -- Florence L. Green, President, California Association of Nonprofits and Board Member, Nonprofit Management Association "Becoming a Player: Advocating Your Cause and Getting Results" -- Alliance for Justice, NAME/TITLE: ORGANIZATION: TOTAL AMOUNT DUE ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP: PHONE: Mail to: Michigan Nonprofit Forum, 34 Kellogg Center, East Lansing Ml 48824 »** payment in Advance Required on All Orders * * * � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_1992-Membership-Application Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992 membership-application Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992 membership-application. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49717 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/dbe23b34c8e74fd72657a9d990ac5475.pdf bbec6a236657f67bd6c33b80337f46c5 PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. MNF Summit - February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" Audience Members Ms. Susan Bolhouse Vice President Waverly Board of Education Mr. William Dansby Executive Vice President Michigan Optometric Association Mr. Paul Booden Director Michigan Health Occupations Mr. Arthur Dudley President Greater Lansing Urban League Judge Thomas E. Brennan President Thomas M. Cooley Law School Mr. David O. Egner Executive Assistant to the Chairman W.K. Kellogg Foundation Dr. Christopher M. Clark Professor of Education Michigan State University Mr. David Fukuzawa Program Director The Skillman Foundation Ms. Donna M. Clarke Administrative Assistant Michigan Nonprofit Forum Ms. Barbara K. Goldman Office of Ombudsman Department of Commerce Dr. Kenneth E. Corey Dean, College of Science Michigan State University Mr. James Helmrich Public Relations Director Michigan Bell Telephone Company �Ms. Dorothy A. Johnson President Council of Michigan Foundations Ms. Judith A. Rapanos Chairman MI Council for Arts & Cultural Affairs Mr. Justin P. King Executive Director MI Association of School Boards Dr. Rene Rosenbaum Research Associate Julian Samora Research Institute Mr. Glenn F. Kossick Executive Director Metro Health Foundation Dr. Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan Mr. Forrest Lewis CPA Plante & Moran Mr. Robert S. Lewis Consultant Lewis Associates Mrs. Maryann Tillson Administrative Secretary Michigan Nonprofit Forum Rev. Leonard M. Young Michigan Region President RLDS Church Ms. Frances Parker President League of Women Voters of Michigan Ms. Sharon Parks Senior Research Associate Michigan League for Human Services Mr. W. Calvin Patterson Executive Director McGregor Fund Ms. Linda Patterson Administrative Director Council of Michigan Foundations Ms. Helen C. Philpott Chairman Community Foundation of Greater Flint Ms. Sharon Radtke Executive Director Voluntary Action Center of Greater Lansing ref:03/09/92, su mma ud i, 1 »t\ rog ra ms\su nunit\ 400 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Audience-Members-Draft Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit audience members draft Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit audience members draft. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49718 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1e1c4eaa778c384ca03d24e039d5d85f.pdf caaa8eb769db3f293a44aed8a7ddd771 PDF Text Text MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 MNF Summit - February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" Audience Members Ms. Susan Bolhouse Vice President Waverly Board of Education Mr. William Dansby Executive Vice President Michigan Optometric Association Mr. Paul Booden Director Michigan Health Occupations Mr. Arthur Dudley President Greater Lansing Urban League Judge Thomas E. Brennan President Thomas M. Cooley Law School Mr. David 0. Egner Executive Assistant to the Chainnan W.K. Kellogg Foundation Dr. Christopher M. Clark Professor of Education Michigan State University Mr. David Fukuzawa Program Director The Skillman Foundation Ms. Donna M. Clarke Administrative Assistant Michigan Nonprofit Forum Ms. Barbara K. Goldman Office of Ombudsman Department of Commerce Dr. Kenneth E. Corey Dean, College of Science Michigan State University Mr. James Helmrich Public Relations Director Michigan Bell Telephone Company �Ms. Dorothy A. Johnson President Council of Michigan Foundations Ms. Judith A. Rapanos Chairman MI Council for Arts & Cultural Affairs Mr. Justin P. King Executive Director MI Association of School Boards Dr. Rene Rosenbaum Research Associate Julian Samora Research Institute Mr. Glenn F. Kossick Executive Director Metro Health Foundation Dr. Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director ~denuCouncil, State U Diversities of Michigan Mr. Forrest Lewis CPA Plante & Moran Mrs. Maryann Tillson Administrative Secretary Michigan Nonprofit Forum Mr. Robert S. Lewis Consultant Lewis Associates Rev. Leonard M. Young Michigan Region President RLDS Church Ms. Frances Parker President League of Women Voters of Michigan Ms. Sharon Parks Senior Research Associate Michigan League for Human Services Mr. W. Calvin Patterson Executive Director McGregor Fund Ms. Linda Patterson Administrative Director Council of Michigan Foundations Ms. Helen C. Philpott Chairman Community Foundation of Greater Flint Ms. Sharon Radtke Executive Director Voluntary Action Center of Greater Lansing ref:03109/92,..m!Nndi .lll\propama\lummit\6400 2 �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, :MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 MNF Summit- Febmary 28. 1992 "Partnerships for Peopk and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" Audience Members Ms. Susan Bolhouse Vice President Waverly Board of Education Mr. William Dansby Executive Vice President Michigan Optometric Association Mr. Paul Booden Director Michigan Health Occupations Mr. Arthur Dudley President Greater Lansing Urban League Judge Thomas E. Brennan President Thomas M. Cooley Law School Mr. David 0. Egner Executive Assistant to the Chainnan W .K. Kellogg Foundation Dr. Christopher M. Clark Professor of Education Michigan State University Mr. David Fukuzawa Program Director The Skillman Foundation Ms. Donna M. Clarke Administrative Assistant Michigan Nonprofit Forum Ms. Barbara K. Goldman Office of Ombudsman Department of Commerce Dr. Kenneth E. Corey Dean, College of Science Michigan State University Mr. James Helmrich Public Relations Director Michigan Bell Telephone Company �Ms. Dorothy A. Johnson President Council of Michigan Foundations Ms. Judith A. Rapanos Chairman MI Council for Arts & Cultural Affairs Mr. Justin P. King Executive Director MI Association of School Boards Dr. Rene Rosenbaum Research Associate Julian Samora Research Institute Mr. Glenn F. Kossick Executive Director Metro Health Foundation Dr. Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan Mr. Forrest Lewis CPA Plante & Moran Mrs. Maryann Tillson Administrative Secretary Michigan Nonprofit Forum Mr. Robert S. Lewis Consultant Lewis Associates Rev. Leonard M. Young Michigan Region President RLDS Church Ms. Frances Parker President League of Women Voters of Michigan Ms. Sharon Parks Senior Research Associate Michigan League for Human Services Mr. W. Calvin Patterson Executive Director McGregor Fund Ms. Linda Patterson Administrative Director Council of Michigan Foundations Ms. Helen C. Philpott Chairman Community Foundation of Greater Flint Ms. Sharon Radtke Executive Director Voluntary Action Center of Greater Lansing nf:03109/92,annmaudi.lll\propama\lummit\6400 2 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Audience-Members-Final-Version Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit audience members final version Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit audience members final version. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49719 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b2b3b502ff124c596e5825db39ede2ca.pdf 5d32be46f7a612f7705d7a7ec9ee7eb2 PDF Text Text ,) MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. January 24, 1992 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Group for the First MNF Summit (February 28, 1992) FROM: Maryellen Lewis SUBJECT: Update I hope your holidays were relaxing and your new year full of promise! We have made much progress on the Summit since our December 19 meeting. Despite the holiday season, we received many additional nominations for the panel from MNF Board members and others. It became clear that we had many more candidates in our top priority list than we could accommodate in 15 chairs! Ed Blews, Russ Mawby and I began issuing invitations from -the expanded list, keeping in mind the issues of balance and representation you all emphasized. It promises to be a strong, dynamic panel! We still need your additional recommendations in a few areas. I attach a questionnaire asking for your best advice, and hope you will fax it back as soon as possible. encl: Questionnaire ref:pp20120,prog\summit,6400\mjt �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICIDGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. Recommendations for Panelists for the February 28 l\1NF Summit PLEASE INCLUDE ADDRESSES AND PHONE NUMBERS 1. These people should be considered TOP PRIORITY CANDIDATES for this discussion of the changing role of Michigan's nonprofit sector in relation to government and business. They are articulate but also balanced, and would contribute greatly to an enlightening dialogue. a. NONPROFIT LEADERS: b. GOVERNMENT LEADERS: c. BUSINESS LEADERS : 2. These are top-notch minority leaders [including names listed above] I nominate: 3. These are top-notch women leaders [including names listed above] I nominate: 4. These are outstate leaders in business and the nonprofit sector who should also be considered [including names listed above] : ref:nom20120,prog\summit,6400\mjt � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Memo-for-Recommendations Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit memo for recommendations Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit memo for recommendations. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49720 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/44b14ca6f07f348506930870d7d4d5ba.pdf 528529130468529845da0d2894ac83ae PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM MNF SUMMIT February 28, 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM SUMMIT February 28, 1992 Lewis: I hate to say that we're already running a little late, so its not a great way to start but its just an exciting morning. I want to welcome you to this first Summit of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. I'm Maryellen Lewis. I'm the Executive Director of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum which is sponsoring this event. You'll be hearing much more about it when it's on the tape. Right now, we're not so I can be a little more relaxed. We have a very, very distinguished panel here this morning, representing leadership from all three parts of our communities — government, business and the non-profit sector. We also have a very, very distinguished audience, so I know jthat its going to be very lively. You will be hearing more about that when our moderator begins. I want you to be encouraged to speak up, to make your comments, particularly the audience at the invited sections, to be sure that you don't feel intimidated by these cameras around here or the fact that there are television lights focused down on you. You will be getting an overview of this morning's program from our moderator, but I wanted to take a few minutes to give you a little orientation, just as a set-up, because I know it may be unfamiliar to some of you. In case you hadn't noticed, you're being filmed and taped, but I don't want you to be nervous about that. There have been a lot of arrangements made to make this as accommodating as possible. The tables are triple clothed so that there won't be a noise problem. You have no need to worry about the mikes. You don't have to touch them. In fact, it would be much better if you didn't. And you don't need to lean in to them. Just speak normally. They're set up to accommodate to you. It would be best if you did pay a little attention to your papers and not have the papers brush up against the microphones. That can cause some problems. Also, please keep in mind that the discussion is not just among the people who are here today, although that's your immediate audience. But because this is being taped, we will be editing the tape and it will be used through our network statewide for educating and informing the public around the state about these very issues. They will be used at ... the edited tape will be used as a stimulus for round table discussions in various parts of the state. I should also point out that word "editing" means that you don't have to worry too much if you make some kind of a snafu and you want it cut out, it will go right on the cutting room floor. �The cameras. . .The microphones are automatic. That is, when you begin to speak, the microphones automatically pick you up. That means that if you're talking to your neighbors, it will pick you up. So please pay a little bit of attention to that. However, the cameras are not automatic and because of that, we will need to pay a little bit of attention to accommodating to our camera crews. So our moderator will recognize you. If you wouldn't mind paying some attention to this moment of having him recognize you so that the camera can then turn to you. Now that may get a little more difficult if things get a little hot, but, for the most part, we'll try to do that. And with this audience that we have here, I'd like to make two points for you so that you're fully aware of this. This mike is not 1 ive now, I be 1 ieve, but wil 1 be when we have the points where the audience will be invited to speak. When you speak, would you please wait to be recognized by the moderator _so that, again, the cameras can focus on you. You might want to, during the discussion, take some notes (There is notepaper in your folders. ) so that you can direct your comments to specific people or points that were raised. And remember it will be edited so your comments can then be put adjacent to those comments in the final tape. Also, when you do speak, please say your name, your organization and your title so that those who are not here in this room and who won't know you will have some understanding of where you are coming from. And now I think that we're ready to begin. I see the cameras are all focused and ready. Our moderator this morning is someone that most of you already know very well. He is the President of the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan, and he is also the Chair of the Public Policy Committee of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. I'm very pleased to introduce to you Dr. Edward Blews. Blews: Thank you, Maryellen. These are my pre-camera remarks. I'm your Phil Donohue for the day. I will be much kinder, though, than he generally is to his audiences. I would like to offer a, word of commendation to Maryellen Lewis and our MNF Executive Director and her staff for all of the work that they have put into this wonderful project. And I'd like to thank each of you leaders who graciously consented to participate. This is an exciting but maiden voyage and trial run of a grand experiment, so please bear with us and be adaptable as we go. Before the cameras roll, I would like to share just a few comments and ground rules about the logistics. First, about the format. From now until about 9:40 we' 11 have the introduction of the Summit, Dr. Robert Payton's comments, we' 11 set the stage for dialogue, and then we' 11 have the introduction of the panelists, and it's my job to try to keep us on track with that process. Then from about 9:40 to noon, �with a mid-morning break I assure you, we will go through three stages of dialogue. Stage 1 involves identification, definition and values of the nonprofit sector. Stage 2 will speak to the relationship between government, business, the nonprofit sector and the changing dynamics, issues and tensions that are at play in those relationships. Stage 3 will involve insights for the future of the relationship or the question, "Where do we go from here?" That gives all of you, then a sense of where we hope to be going today. A few other preparatory comments for the panelists in addition to what Maryellen has shared, and as panelists you'll want to be prepared for a couple of steps that will come very quickly after Dr. Payton's remarks. First, we ask you to please be prepared to briefly introduce yourselves around the table. So rather than having the moderator drone on as you sit there and stiffly smile and the camera pans the room, each of you will _tell the audience, both the video tape audience and the real "people in the audience here, who you are. We ask you to be very brief in that and share this information about yourself: your name, your title, the name of your organization, and one sentence about what you represent or the constituency or interest that you represent. If you wish, you're welcome to write out a note about that before that point in the program. A fore-warning. To begin Stage 1, we will play a little word association game. I'm not going to tell you what the word is yet or you won't be very spontaneous about it. But we ask you. . .There will be two of these, and we ask you to write that word on what should be a fairly stiff piece of card-type paper in front of you. And you'll want to locate that and be sure that you have that. The one word you'll write on the one side and then write the other on the other, and you' ve got a marking pen at your table so you can write it nice and legibly and boldly and largely so that as we go around and do this word association, we'll ask you to hold up the card and be sure to point it toward a camera so that as you say the word, the camera can also visually pick up the association that you have made. Thirdly, in our discussion we want to focus on principles, dynamics and relationships. Please feel free to cite cases or issues in illustration of principles or relationships; but let's avoid debating interminably specific issues or specific -political issues. We want to focus on principles and on relationships here. Though 3 hours seems like a lot of time, with the caliber of the hearts and minds on this panel, I assure you that it will fly and it already is flying. We have a full agenda, so please be frank and forceful in your comments, but also try to be succinct. On the other hand, I will need plenty of help in �trying to moderate this panel, particularly in avoiding dead space on the air. So please be ready to jump in — freely jump in. But I do ask you to give some sort of a signal when you're ready to speak out so that I can attempt to recognize you and that also gives us the pause that brings the camera around to you. If you use acronyms, please help to interpret them. Realize that we're talking to an audience that does not necessarily know what ICUM is which happens to be the acronym for our association. I doubt that any of you knew what that acronym meant until I just mentioned it. And then an invitation to the audience. As Maryellen has mentioned, there will be 2 points in the program where you will be invited to come to the microphone here and join in the discussion. The first will occur at the end of Stage 1 of the discussion when we talk about identification of the nonprofit sector, and then the second will come at the end of Stage 3 as we try to bring a sense of closure and a sense of conclusion to the deliberations of the day. I trust that I have anticipated any questions that you may have and, having said that then, we will not proceed with all due warning to the cameras to the formal part of the program here today. Hello. It is my privilege to welcome you to this special and first summit/ sponsored by the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. On behalf of the forum's Chair, Dr. Russell Mawby, our Executive Director, Maryellen Lewis, and the Board of Directors of the Forum, many of whom are gathered in this room, we invite you to brace yourself for a lively and energetic dialogue about some issues and relationships very important in our society today. My name is Edward Blews, and in my professional life, I serve as the President of the of the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan. But I stand before you today, as a member of the Board of Directors of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Established in 1988, the Michigan Nonprofit Forum is a dynamic new coalition of statewide organizations and leaders representing the wonderful diversity of nonprofit entities. The Michigan Nonprofit Forum describes itself as, and I quote, "...a statewide alliance to promote the awareness and effectiveness of Michigan's nonprofit sector and to advance the cause of volunteerism and philanthropy in the state^jj In its relatively short life but rapid maturation, the Forum has evolved into an enterprise charged with achieving a new awareness and increased capacity of Michigan's nonprofit sector, and with interfacing funders, nonprofits and the public to help promote volunteerism and philanthropy in this state of our's. The Forum views volunteerism, philanthropy and the nonprofit sector not as proprietary issues but as public goods which �broadly affect the state's economy, polity and quality of life, and which, therefore, merit careful attention. Consequently, the Forum seeks to promote dialogue, cooperation and collaboration across the many, many nonprofit fields such as health, human services, arts and humanities, community development, education and religion.! In fact, this particular organization called the Forum may~T5e the first time that the many different types of nonprofit organizations and causes have gathered in the same room at the same time to talk about the same things. VT5ut we are here today because the Forum also seeks to promote that same kind of dialogue and cooperation across the sectors — that is the government sector or the public sector, the nonprofit sector and, of course, the business sector or the for-profit sector Jj The Board of Directors of the Forum has adopted 6 guiding principles designed to reflect the mission of the Michigan ^Nonprofit Forum. One of those principles states, "The service of the nonprofit sector to the public depends on an interactive partnership between service providers or nonprofit entities, funders, policymakers and the public. The Michigan nonprofit community should promote constructive dialogue among all these parties." You will probably hear the word "mission" used rather frequently, or so we hope, during the discussions of the day. This Summit which brings us together really goes to the very heart of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum's raissionj. Those of you who talk and those of you who listen and look in on today's proceedings are really participating in a rather historic revent. This is a unique undertaking, an exciting experiment. fit is the first in a series of forums bringing together our society's leaders to think on compelling issues affecting our society and the nonprofit sector. The purpose, though, is not to provide the answers but rather to pose and clarify and stimulate the questions, and from them to spark an on-going dialogue. The title of this particular summit islwhat I would call a meaningful mouthful. It is, ("Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community." Now very shortly we will be introducing our very distinguished pane1 of government, business and nonprofit leaders. But first, to set the stage for our dialogue, we will hear some -remarks by a very distinguished national leader and recognized expert on philanthropy. Before I introduce him, let me simply mention for the information of the audience that he has prepared and circulated to the panelists today a paper discussing the theme of this particular summit and he will share some comments about that theme in just a moment. His name is Dr. Robert L. Payton. He comes to us as the Director of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. From �1977 to 1987, he served as the President of the EXXON Education Foundation. His very impressive leadership career has included 2 college presidencies and a United States Ambassadorship. The recipient of honors to numerous to cite, he is an author on philanthropy who puts his words into action as leader and volunteer for countless good causes. Please join me in welcoming Dr. Payton to address us on the topic at hand. Dr. Payton. Payton: Good morning. I am very pleased to be here with you. 1 I was pleased to be invited to prepare the paper that has been circulated to you. It occurred to me when someone commented before the meeting that they had read the paper that I hope it is provocative enough to serve its purpose, but not so provocative that it puts its author in jeopardy. I hope to stimulate conversation that comes from you because you represent, the community that is the matter of concern on this _occasion.\ come from outside. I don't presume to know the particuTar circumstances of this community, so it becomes very important for you to articulate what you think is most relevant about that paper, if anything. So I want you to draw from it rather than attempting to impose further my sort of author's guide to what it says. Let me, however, talk about it for a moment, or talk about the subject for a moment, in a somewhat different way. Over the last several years, along with everyone else, I have been profoundly impressed by the events in Central and Eastern Europe. I'm old enough to be able to say that my generation as a generation never believed that it was possible that such events would take place without vast bloodshed and destruction. So it is that this most extraordinary event provide us with, I think, an extraordinarily important opportunity.] Given the conditions that would cause this meeting to be of compelling interest to the people in Michigan, what would an analogous meeting be like in Russia today? Who would come and what values and understandings would they bring? We're advised they're invited to provide advice increasingly to countries in that part oj^ the world that will help them develop a third sector. Vwhat we are watching is a situation where societies are moving from a condition of being one sector societies, with strong encouragement from the West to -become two sector societies in the beginnings of suggestions that they should become three sector societies. It is my strong conviction that unless they become three sector societies, they will not become democracies. It is my very strong conviction that understanding that the United States is a three sector society is essential to understanding it as a democratic society. �This is not a subject at the margin of our interests. This is a subject at the center of our lives, whichever sector we are parts of, because as citizens we have had the great good fortune to^become members — to be members of a three sector society* \The first sector can be thought of — the government that is — as having an essential defining term, and the term that I have to use that says that without it you can't talk about government is the word "power"; the legitimate use of force in behalf of the community. If you take the notion of that away from your notion of government, it seems to me your notion of government collapses. There is a defining term of the second sector that will be something like the word "wealth" or the word "property"; the right to acquire and use and to dispose of wealth and property according to your own individual private interests. If you were to take that out of the marketplace, the second sector, _it would collapse. So my habit as a professor is to say to my students, "Then, of course, you're ready to tell me what the defining term is for the third sector." And, along with most professors, there has been a heavy, ominous silence. I will break the silence and tell you that my notion is that the word has to have something to do with morality, and I mean morality only in the sense that intervening in the lives of other people for their benefit with no public mandate is a moral action. And if you took that out of the third sector, you wouldn't have a third sector. ~~r—' p— Part of the point of my paper is that we need to keep those 3 values distinct while we encourage interaction among the 3 sectors. Final note. I've tried to summarize responses to a request for assistance from someone for whom one has no formal responsibility. An individual or an organization comes to you asking for your assistance and it is someone for whom you have no formal responsibility. That would fall into the zone of what we usually call charity or philanthropy. What questions might come to mind, and I think often do whether they are articulated — verbalized — or not, when that question, that request for assistance is posed, the first one is the notion of self-help. If someone asks me for assistance, that person has no formal claim on me to respond affirmatively. It is reasonable for me to ask what that person or organization is doing to help himself or herself or themselves. Fundamentally, the central notion of the place of self-help in this larger, complex system we're talking about. . . I do this, by the way, usually with a cube. A cube is, in my case, a simple cardboard box with these words around the side. Its �the kind of thing that Rubik would have designed as a cube if he'd only had tenth grade geometry like I did. But the first face on it, in other words, says "self-help." The second face says "mutual aid. " What are you and your family and your friends and your neighbors and your associates and your colleagues and those other people who do have some formal or informal claim on you, what are you doing in that way, working together with others, to deal with the problem? The third face of this has the word "government assistance." Its a recognition that there are many things that we cannot do as individuals or groups according to our self-interest or our mutual benefit. There are some things that are so important or so difficult or so complicated that we have to assume that we will not rely on those things, but we will require all of us to participate in some way, that is to say, the simplest, most familiar way. We will decide to tax one another to do Certain kinds of things. If each one of those 3 questions is answered — self-help, mutual aid, government assistance — in some plausible way, satisfactorily for you, you then face the philanthropic question. Are you prepared to offer assistance to help those people for whom you have no personal, formal responsibility? Now a cube has 6 faces, so there is a top and a bottom and I'm not trying to suggest superiority and inferiority here. But since we're talking about philanthropy, the top of the box says that there is a dimension that cuts through all these things all the time and that's the word "altruism" — concern about others. If that weren' t a factor in the human condition, we wouldn't be here. We wouldn't be talking about this subject. It's always present to some extent. The most rigid, rigorous libertarian is altruistic to some extent, like it or not. But then all the rest of us who are, obviously, high-minded and altruistic are also egoistic, self-interested — to some extent. And altruism and egoism are not only on the top and the bottom of the box, they are on each side of this discussion. That the people who come to you have a selfinterest just as you have an altruistic one. But you should remember they have altruistic concerns and that you have selfinterested ones. I think some of these brief notes are intended to suggest that this first sector of government, these notions of self-help and mutual aid in the marketplace and elsewhere, and philanthropy — self-interest — concern about others — interact in our lives in absolutely extraordinary and wonderful ways that makes our society, in my judgement, the most privileged that I know of^J And I hope that sense is not something that one is that proud about in the sense that its a claim of virtue on one's part because we are not here 8 �because of our own initiatives but because of others who have gone before us have made it possible and desirable for us to be here. That principle of the philanthropic tradition that we are part of is what, I think, really distinguishes American democracy. It is the best thing, I think, that we have that we can share with the rest of the world. It is the best tradition, I think, to help us face the kinds of difficulties you're talking about in your community and we're talking about in mine today. Each one of us is not just part of a sector. Each one of us is a part of that traditional And so I wish you well in your discussions and will close at that point — short of my normal 50 minute lecture. Thank you. Blews: JPhank you, Dr. Payton. I'm certain you were very popular with your students with that kind of lecture. To carry on the dialogue from here, we have gathered around this table a panel of leaders from government, from the business world and from the nonprofit world. And at this point I 'm going to toss out a little teaser because it may that there is a fourth sector. These 3 sectors that I have mentioned, and sector is a term that we will hear frequently today, are certainly a significant, significant part of the infrastructure of our society. The government or the public sector, the business world or the for-profit sector, and the nonprofit sector or what is sometimes called the charitable world. And I will mention the teaser, that there may be a fourth sector that somebody may strike upon as we continue our dialogue here. There are 2 things in particular that strike me about this particular panel. The first is that they are a very, very distinguished group of government, business and nonprofit leaders. The second thing that strikes me about this panel is its diversity. Now I am also acutely aware that a panel of leaders like this cannot be kept down and cannot be kept silent for very long. And so we are going to now ask each member of the panel to briefly introduce himself or herself and the perspective from which they speak to us today, beginning with Mr. Yamanishi on my left. Yamanishi; Thank you. My name is Herb Yamanishi. I'm the Executive Director of the Michigan Community Action Agency Association. Community Action Agencies are part of the old War on Poverty Program. We cover all 83 counties of the State of Michigan and are one of the largest social service/human service delivery systems in the State of Michigan serving over a million and a half people. And curiously enough, out of the �War on Poverty, I think to some degree some credit can be taken that the growth in the nonprofit world today. Sederburg: I'm Bill Sederburg, Vice President of Public Sector Consultants here in Lansing, Michigan. Public Sector Consultants is an independent, for-profit research firm specializing in State public policy and public opinion research. And you asked what sector we represent. With the name of Public Sector Consultants, we're for-profit. I'm not sure exactly what sector I'm supposed to be representing, so I think I'll represent the for-profit sector today and shed my 12 years previous experience of being in the State Legislature. I'll let the other folks on the panel that are currently in the Legislature try to defend that institution. Mawby: I'm Russ Mawby, Chairman _W. K. Kellogg Foundation grant-making foundation. as the Chairman of the Nonprofit Forum. Upjohn: I'm Elizabeth Upjohn. I'm Vice Chair of the Kalamazoo Foundation. I am 1992 Campaign Chairman of the Greater Kalamazoo United Way Campaign, so you can see I'm a bit of a masochist. I am new kid on the block as far as the Michigan Nonprofit Forum is concerned, and delighted to be here. I've been a volunteer in Kalamazoo County for more than 42 years. Kostielney: I'm Sister Monica Kostielney, the Executive Director of the Michigan Catholic Conference, which is the public policy arm for the Roman Catholic Church in Michigan, which addresses the issues ranging from aging to taxation and everything in between. Also, currently I have the privilege of Chairing the Partnership for Michigan Health which is another exciting coalition that is discussing in a very high-road fashion the dominant issue of health on the State agenda today. Thank you. Cunningham: I'm Father William Cunningham, Director of Focus Hope which is a Metropolitan Detroit Human and Civil Rights organization, and our objective over the past 23 years has been to stimulate people and help people to become productive as a major part of their right in human dignity. And the other side of the coin, to enhance that by asking them to be contributing. Our organization has 40,000 volunteers. In addition to being nonprofit, we are also very competitive and for-profit. Roehrig: Oh. I 'm Larry Roehrig. I'm Secretary/Treasurer of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 25. I'm here on behalf of the entire membership of the Michigan AFL-CIO. That stands for the American Federation 10 and Chief Executive Officer of the which is an independent, private I also have the privilege of serving Board of Trustees of the Michigan �of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations. And I, too, wear two hats. I am also the Secretary/Treasurer of the United Way of Michigan. Clark: I'm Jane Deanne Clark, Senior Director for Health Policy Analysis at Michigan Healthcare Institute which is the notfor-profit research arm of Michigan Hospital Association. Michigan Hospital Association represents all close-to-200 hospitals in the State of Michigan. They are, in the vast majority, nonprofit and in addition to that, I also am Executive Director of a unique organization which combines business, state government and the hospitals in the data collection effort, and that organization is called Michigan Health Data Corporation. Kosteva: Hello. I'm Jim Kosteva, a fourth term Legislator from southeastern Michigan. My legislative focus has focused on jthe E's — education, environment and economic development. Bianco: I'm Joe Bianco from The Founders Society of the Detroit Institute of Arts which is the private sector support organization of the DIA. My entire background, as some of the people in this room know, has been in engineering and finance and economics, and yet I found myself running a major corporate giving program some years ago, now in the nonprofit sector asking for money and trying to assist in the management of a nonprofit. So I've had a chance to look at it from both sides. Hoffecker; I'm Fred Hof fecker. I'm an Assistant Attorney General. I work with Frank Kelly. For the past decade or so I've been fortunate enough to have as part of my duties of supervising the Charitable Trust section of the office and working with both sides of the nonprofit sectors, both the grant givers and the grant seekers, and I'm very pleased to be here today. Benavides Hello. My name is Tony Benavides and I'm a Councilman for the City of Lansing. I'm also Executive Director for Cristo Ray Community Center, a human service agency which is a private, nonprofit organization located here in Lansing. Cantrell: Hello. I'm Aaron Cantrell. I guess I'm here in 2 capacities. I'm Executive Director of the Voluntary Accident Center in Kalamazoo and Volunteer Centers are basically there to recruit volunteers who are trained through our administered volunteer program, and to promote the whole concept of volunteerism. I'm also a Vice President of the Volunteer Centers of Michigan which is made up of all the Volunteer Centers here in Michigan and our purpose is to develop new centers and to promote volunteerism throughout the State. 11 �Miller: I'm Judy Miller. In my present life I am now Michigan Business Ombudsman in the Department of Commerce, a gubernatorial appointee given the responsibility of solving problems that businesses have with State government and providing some solutions in regard to that. Also, on special assignment in the areas of Arts and Child Care. Epolito; Hello. My names is James Epolito. I'm the Chief Executive Officer of Blue Care Network/Health Central, a Lansing-based 70,000 member Health Maintenance Organization. Work: Good morning. I'm Lois Work. I'm Vice President of New Detroit Incorporated which is the nation's first urban coalition. We began in 1967 to try and insure that the needs of the poor and the disadvantaged in Detroit and the Detroit Metropolitan Area are met. We do this basically through advocacy on a policy level and through serving as both a catalyst and an implementer of program projects. Wilson: Hello. I'm Mark Wilson of Michigan State University where, in addition to teaching Political Economy, I direct a nonprofit Michigan project which is a research and information dissemination initiative to inform the nonprofit community in Michigan more about its experiences and the scale of operations. Vaughn Hello. I'm Senator Jackie Vaughn III, Associate President of the Michigan Senate. I'm a student both of the public and the private sector. Cox: Good morning. My name is E.L. Cox. I'm currently the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Accident Fund of Michigan. In my former life, I was the Chairman of the Amerisure Insurance Companies representing the business sector of this and the target of many of you for contributions over the years. Gallagher; I'm Jan Gallagher. I'm a partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm of Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg. I practice extensively in the area of exempt organization law. I edit independent sector's quarterly publication, STATE TAX TRENDS FOR NONPROFITS. And I'm currently engaged as a consultant for independent sector in the development of their white paper on the role of nonprofit organizations. Bandstra: I'm Representative Rick Bandstra, a Legislator in the Michigan House from west Michigan. I 'm in government now. In a previous life I was a lawyer in the private sector and I continue to be involved in a lot of nonprofit board activities back in Grand Rapids. 12 �Ivory: Good morning. My name is Bob Ivory. I'm the President and Chief Professional Officer of the United Way of Michigan. United Way of Michigan is an association of some 110 United Ways throughout the State, raising about $139 million in this past year. Additionally, we also fund a series of, a network of 20 statewide agencies offering services throughout the State. Anderson: Hi. I'm N. Charles Anderson, President of the Detroit Urban League, a United Way Agency in southeastern Michigan. I also have the distinct pleasure of being the Chair of the Michigan Council of Urban League Executives. There are 113 Urban Leagues across the country that are part of the National Urban League and we all are United Way agencies, and our basic mission is to enable African Americans and other minorities to reach their fullest human potentials. Blews: Thank you to each of you. Through those introductions we can certainly see the interrelationship in our own professional and personal lives between the 3 sectors that we have described. |~In his prepared paper, Dr. Payton described this Summit as an exercise in exploratory discourse. We enter the discussion with questions, and will explore possibilities. Continuing to quote from Dr. Payton, the Summit itself has no authority to affect change. In fact, the Summit has only the moral authority we may bring to it, individually and collectively. If we are successful, others will carry the discussion forward towards action and implementation. We will be pursuing this discussion in 3 stages. We might think of it as the booster stages on a rocket or on a space ship. Each stage of the discussion, we hope, will thrust us forward to the next level and the next stage of the dialogue. Those 3 stages, briefly stated, are first — identity or identification; secondly — the evolving partnerships; and thirdly — insights and principles to guide us into the future. Stage 1, then, really poses an identity crisis. That is, what is the identification of the nonprofit sector? What is this entity — this thing that we call nonprofit? What is its role in a pluralistic and democratic society? What do we expect of it? What values energize it? What distinguishes it from government and from business? Let's start off our discussion with a little association or a little word of game associ. . .a word association. In fact, I'm gonna. ..we're that and I'm going to start over again. That's all of you, I know. I can make mistakes. 13 game word of little game of going to cut reassuring to �Let's begin with a little game of word association. It may be revealing. Each of our panelists has a large card in front of them and a marker pen. I'm going to ask them now to write on that card the very first and honestly the very first word or adjective that comes into your mind when we say the word "nonprofit sector." And if this were a television game show, the clock would be ticking and the music would be proceeding. Okay. The time is up. And so this time, beginning on this side of the room, we'll simply go around the panel and identify what those words are with the panelist holding up the card so that our audience, our visual audience, can see as well as hear what that association is. Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Well the first thing I think of is Social Services. Ivory: Hyphenated concept — Volunteer-Driven. Bandstra: ~A long word that barely fits — Altruism. Gallagher: Public Good. Cox: I used Public Purpose. Vaughn: I used For All. Wilson: I used Invisible, because we look at what nonprofits do but we don't think of how they're organized. Work: And I used Conscience. Community Conscience. Epolito: Social Good. Miller: And I'll add the word the word Community to Conscience. Cantrell: Community Welfare. Benavides: Free. Payton: Here's an academic. Serial Reciprocity. Which is a word...a term you'll remember but it really means simply, pass it on. The idea of repaying the good works that have been done for you by the good works you do for others in turn. Hoffecker: I thought it was a comment on the Kellogg Foundation. bottom line from the nonprofit is Good. Bianco: We're all working together for the good of the Community. Kosteva: I thought of a different bottom line — I thought I needed one word. 14 Fund Raising. I meant The �Clark: I'll add a little specificity. perhaps. Hospital. Roehrig: Spoken as a Treasurer — Cunningham: Spoken as a theologian — Voluntary. Because it springs from the highest instincts and highest ideals of human nature. Kostielney: I wanted to put Hard Work but I put Service instead. Upjohn: Spoken from experience — Mawby: Voluntary. Sederburg: And Charity. Yamanishi: You've got two votes for Charity. Blews: 'Charity wins by a plurality. That's marvelous. An illustration, again, of the diversity of the sector. But let's play the game one more time. What word now, what value...What value pops into your mind when we say the word nonprofit sector? What underlying value do you first think of? And the pens are busily scribbling again. What value do we think of associated first with the nonprofit sector? And this time we'll begin with Councilman Benavides and go that way. Donations. Volunteer. Benavides: Commitment. Cantrell: Caring. Miller: Love. Epolito: Credibility. Work: Service. Wilson: Altruism. Vaughn: Good for All. Cox: Altruism. Gallagher: Another vote for Altruism. Bandstra: Yet another vote for Altruism. Ivory: Community Good. Anderson: Positive Results. 15 I'm too involved with my job, �Yamanishi: Another vote for Altruism over here. Sederburg: We differ this time. Mawby: Caring. Upjohn: This is the Russ & Betty Show. Kostielney: Understood in its entomological sense — Cunningham: That was good. Courage. Roehrig: From the heart — Loving. Clark: Community Good. Kosteva: JSternal Hope. Bianco: Caring. Hoffecker: Freedom — to make choices, where to put your time or your money in your altruistic way to do good. Payton: And my word is Democracy which tries to capture these notions of Community and Caring. Blews: Mr. Epolito, you used the word Credibility. As a person from the business perspective, how do you think of the nonprofit sector? How would you define or describe, in a paragraph, what the nonprofit sector is? Epolito: Well, I think of, when I think of what nonprofit means, it means, to me anyway, to not benefit to any one individual's good; that the dollars that are collected, the services that are provided are not for any individual, personal need but for the good of all. And so I said the word "credibility" because I find that many nonprofit organizations, and having worked for some, have had a very difficult time in achieving and maintaining credibility. But all the way through, that seems to be a mission. Blews: Representative Bandstra. As a legislator, what do you think of? What is your definition of the nonprofit sector? Bandstra: I guess I'd like to follow up on something Jim said about that and I think that what's happening here with the credibility problem is what happens so often times in all kinds of institutions in our society, that good apples are infected with the aura that surrounds some bad apples. And I've often wondered whether we, as State Legislators or nationally, ought to come up with some better system of required disclosure of Human Respect. Caring. Compassion. And understood in its entomological sense — 16 �how nonprofit organizations work to provide assurance to everyone that through some standardized reporting system, the institutions that they are supporting are reputable and worthy of their support, to deal with the kind of public perception problem that sometimes does infect the nonprofit side, unfortunately and unwarrantedly often. Blews How do you in the nonprofit sector react to that particular idea? Father Cunningham? Cunningham; To me, credibility is...is less...far less important than integrity. I don't think people ought to be trusted or believed. I think they ought to have track records to be able to demonstrate that they' re worthy of the support of government and partnership with industry. Blews: Lets refer...return to the notion, though, of legislative ^involvement in terms of helping to assure accountability of the nonprofit sector. Mr. Bianco, from the perspective of the Detroit Institute of the Arts, how does that resonate with you? Bianco: I think the role of government really ought to be a role of clearly defining that they do want to help the nonprofit sector. I think our national administration, both the Reagan Administration and the Bush Administration, has failed rather substantially, in my opinion, in defining the importance of the nonprofit sector — the third sector — and giving impetus to it. I also believe that in our own state, there has been a failure of leadership, both from the current administration as well as the previous administration, in clearly defining and supporting the role of the third sector. Having said that, I think the accountability question that Representative Bandstra brings. . .raises is a very good one. Some 14 years ago, I was one of the people working with the Detroit Chamber of Commerce that suggested that in our laws in the state we require a certified public accounting firm audit of all of our local units of government as well as our regional authorities. I think the same thing really ought to be true of the nbnprofits, for example, who receive any kind of State funds. I think that ought to be a simple requirement. The Auditor General comes around now, but a certified audit each year is useful to management and its useful to regulators. So I think that kind of enabling accountability that doesn't get everybody involved in the micro management of the nonprofit, I think setting that framework would be a very healthy contribution, in my opinion, that the Legislature could make to the credibility of our nonprof its. Blews: You've used the term "definition" in your comments. Sister Monica, as the Executive Director of the Michigan Catholic 17 �Conference you're part of the nonprofit sector, define the nonprofit sector? How do you Kostielneyj Well, I think my understanding of the nonprofit sector comes from the very nature of the human person, and that is if you begin with the premise that each person is good and has desire to do good and then moves out from that premise and coalesces with other people to good for society or for the common good, you have a legitimate group of citizenry who have a right to be as recognized as the other sectors in society. I do not see the nonprofit sector as kind of picking up what other people can't do or won't do. I see that as a bad approach to nonprofits; but rather that there is a basic good that drives one to accomplish good and that is a basis then for forming the nonprofit sector, inn the whole spectrum or range of issues or values that touch human lives, from basic human needs to the transcendent values that we all seek — going right from basic human needs to the arts. And so there is a 'legitimate place, then, for the nonprofit sector to be present and very active in the range of human activities. Blews: We've said a great deal about values with regard to the nonprofit sector. But when we ask the question of definition, we rea 1 ly haven' t very c learly de f ined what the nonprofit sector is. And we're fortunate to have with us today a national expert in that regard. And, of course, a national expert always has far more credibility than one of us. The old prophet without honor. Miss Jan Gallagher, as you have heard, is Council with a law firm and is a recognized expert on this whole issue of the definition and the protection of the nonprofit sector. And she, as you have heard, is conducting a study of the independent sector or the nonprofit sector in the process of preparing a white paper on that very subject. Miss Gallagher, structurally, what is it that makes nonprofits nonprofits? Gallagher; I think that probably the single, most important structural differentiation is the one that we've already discussed this morning, and that is the concept that nonprofits, as a matter of law, are barred from operating for the private benefit of anyone. That's a concept that often doesn't get, in my judgment, the attention it deserves. It certainly is the single characteristic that distinguishes nonprofit organizations most clearly from business enterprises. The -concept of no private benefit involves an attention to salary levels that are reasonable, to operating in a way that doesn't advance the private interest of any individual or any selfselected group of individuals. It also, for most of the organizations today we're calling nonprofit, involves a commitment of their assets irrevocably to a public purpose. Again, that's something that sometimes gets lost in discussions of the differences between a business and a 18 �nonprofit organization. A self-imposed characteristic, not one that's actually required by law, at least not very frequently, is that the types of nonprofits, again that we're discussing this morning, typically are governed by volunteer Boards of Directors. And, again, that's an aspect of nonprofit structure that, I think, has not gotten the public attention that it deserves recently. The concept of a group of volunteers coming together in a community to form an organization in response to a community need, and then lending their time to provide policy guidance to that organization, is an important characteristic of nonprofit organizations. Finally, I think its a characteristic of nonprofit organizations that they do exist to provide some form of public good or public benefit. Blews: In your study, you've been looking at the broad range of entities that fall within that term nonprofit sector. Can you ,give us a sense of what that range encompasses? Cunningham* Well, for purposes of the independent sector paper, the organizations that make up independent sectors' membership and the steering committee of the group that's looking at this issue have divided themselves into the following categories: we have arts organizations; we have civic and human rights organizations; education; environment; health; public advocacy; religion; and social welfare. And that, I think, is a fair description of the diversity that makes up the independent sector. Blews: As we played the word association game, it was fascinating to see the number of different values that were identified with regard to the nonprofit sector. And I understand that in the study that you are conducting, that is, in fact, one of the things that you are compiling is, in a sense, a compendium of those values that are found within the nonprofit sector. Could you give us a checklist of those values? Well, the approach the steering committee took in its discussions was to try to evolve a set of values, social and cultural values, that the nonprofit sector embodies and nurtures. And I'd like to stress that this paper, thank you, that this paper is very much in the process of development; that the values that I'm about to describe are not finished, and that I'm very appreciative of the opportunity to be here -this morning, and I hope that this discussion is going to inform my further work in this area. The first value that we've described is called...we're calling "Giving, Service and Community." And this value states something that we just heard all around this table this morning — the basic moral obligation of people to care for and serve others. It...As we're using the term, its defined 19 �as the value that creates a fundamental sense of community. Without giving, without service, we don't have community. The second value is "Pluralism." And, in a sense, that's almost antithetical because at the same time that we're building community, we're also affirming the value of diversity, the ability within the community to speak out for other points of view. And that, I think, is one of the critical things that nonprofits must do. Nonprofits also, within the concept of pluralism, encourage individuals, encourage groups to come together to act on their own values and their own beliefs. They provide a structure for people to do that. "Civic Participation" is a third value. Again, its a way for individuals to come together to act for positive social change within our democratic structure, and in this way, and I think _that Dr. Payton mentioned this in his paper and again this morning, we're. . .we are sustaining and renewing the democratic process. Without viable voluntary organizations, the democratic process would wither. The next value is the "Development of Human Potential." Most nonprofits exist in one way or another to a greater or lesser extent to help people to grow — to be as good as they can be. In this value we have the commitment to excellence in education, to excellence in scholarship, to research, to artistic expression. We have a lot of other things in this value as well. The development of strong families, sound health, healthy environment, an overall positive moral character for people, altruism. "Compassionate Response to Human Need" is the next value. That's a very important one for the social services sector. Voluntary organizations are the ones who exist to mobilize community resources to care for the poor, the sick and the disabled, the elderly, others with special needs here in the United States and around the world. Finally, we have the value of "Faith." Its impossible to talk about the independent sector and ignore the importance of the religious community within it. And through the voluntary sector, we have churches and religious organizations which provide a means for people to practically express their faith. Religious organizations...(tape stopped) . . .at least three others. One is the important role that nonprofits play as the protector of the legacies of past cultures, and I think that that is a critical role for the arts community. A second is that nonprofits play an important role in this country in providing perspective on the future. Since they're not bound by a profit motive, nonprofits are 20 �able to guard the present, look to the future, hopefully to plan as we make transitions into the 21st century. And, finally, and I think that this is very important for nonprofit organizations to be themselves, to be architects and practitioners of ethical behavior. And this is a value...I think the other values are ways in which nonprofits provide a structure for people to act. This particular value is one in which nonprofits themselves must set the example as a way, again going back to what Dr. Payton was saying a few minutes ago, as a way of teaching people trust. Blews: Thank you. Bianco: I don't want to get us off the schedule you're on, so I'd like to just make one response to Jan's comments .f You know I think when we talk about what' s the difference between the third sector or the nonprofits and the other two sectors within the United States, that's one perspective^^ Another perspective that I think we need to examine at some point in these kinds of discussions, which I frankly hope will be on-going for quite a time because I think there's a great challenge to the third sector going on in this country today, and I hope we come together again^... But I think one of the other things we have to compare^^In the United States, as we well know, there is about 31 per cent o f our Gros s National Product that is consumed by taxes in the Gross National Product. The European example, as I'm sure many of you have studied these things probably more carefully than I have, have seen that about 41 per cent of the European Gross National Product is consumed in taxes^X^h® European model is certainly, from a value point of view, has many of the same Christian and Judeo-Christian values and motivations that are here in our society. I think those kinds of values are operative and strong influences on both sides of the Atlantic in that sense. But in the European models, clearly they have made a different decision. /The third sector is certainly not as important there as it is in the United States, and they've made a decision to provide the basic kinds of caring services that Sister Monica referred to. They've made a decision to provide for arts, for culture, for education, for all of those things; but they've chosen to provide it largely through federal government taxation and federal government programming. So in that sense, clearly we have a remarkably different model in the United States. And then I think we get into the question of, "Who delivers the service the best? What are the results?" It seems to me Charles had a results sign over there. Who delivers the results better? And I think that alone is a tremendous , challenge to all of us in the nonprofit sector to think abgut. So I guess the point I'd make is that (1) we are clearly different from the European model, to say nothing, Professor Payton, about the Eastern Bloc model; and (2) within our own country, the merger between the third sector and governmental What's the reaction to those values? 21 Mr. Bianco? �influences, I think, is something that again is going to make this distinction a little bit more blurred as we go forward. Blews: Yamanishi; Mr. Yamanishi. It seems to me that what Jan has put down here and what we're defining is not. . .nonprofit sector is not quite as pure and as moral as we would like it to be. I don't think it is. The underlying assumption is, and historically, we had charities and the concept of charity was what was used. As a matter of fact, if you look at the history of nonprofits, the term charities used to be used in a lot of the names of organizations. The United Way had charities in its name previous to the time it changed to The United Fund. I think nonprofit sector can't be defined quite so pristine and purely. Its a dynamic. Its a force that's pushed between the private sector and the public sector, and you have ^institutions, organizations within the nonprofit sector that are leaning one way or the other constantly. Its a dynamic that. . .and you'll find organizations that are mimicking, maybe almost substantially, the private sector in the way in which they operate and the way in which they deal with benefits, personal benefits, they way in which they address problems, etc. And then you'll find other organizations that are much more allied with government and operate in a much more experience with community action agencies. And a lot of them that, even though they're private, nonprofit agencies, had solely government funding and had government people on their Boards as directors and so then they became much more of a political entity in the lo.cal community. So you have a dynamic and that's, I think that's what we created was a dynamic that helps us to define the forces between the public sector and the private sector. That's where we...I think we should begin to look at the definition of what a nonprofit is. Blews: Do we need a greater clarification, a greater understanding of the values, or are the values that important? Yamanishi; I_ think it encompasses all these values that everybody has addressed in some way or another. What it is...What we try to... I think what we' re trying to do, what the independent sector is trying to do, is help to define more appropriately, "Where is the middle ground that the general public is going to accept in terms of this dynamic?" Blews: Dr. Sederburg, for a number of years you represented that general public in the State Senate of the State of Michigan. Dr. Payton, in his paper, refers to a rather interesting term — "teliopathy" — the loss of mission or the disease of purpose which really goes to a values question also. What's your reaction to that? 22 �Sederburg; Gee, Edf I'm just delighted to be asked that question. What about a nice softball question like, "What do you think good is? or something like that? Teliopathy, of all things* Well, as I understand Dr. Payton's comments on teliopathy, its talking about lack of focus and loss of mission in organizations — kind of a drift without a sense of mission. And I'll try and tie that in with what Herb said and then also with what Joe said. I think government is losing its sense of mission as to what the public really wants government to do. I really feel sorry for all these candidates running around running for President because the public is giving them totally mixed messages. Do they want National Health Care? Do they not want National Health Care? Do they want Jobs programs? Do they not want Jobs programs? And its such a mixed bag that government itself has lost its sense of mission and its causing all sorts of dislocations in the political system. The mission is also central to this debate, in my opinion, because I 'm going to be perhaps thrown out the room here with this, but I think the nonprofit sector is defined by what the others are not. You're the residue of everything else, and its driven by market functions. For-profit, when we look at it, the public sector, we look at what are the markets out there, those market niches, that we can go out there and do some work and, hopefully, make enough to feed the kids. Government looks at constituencies as a marketplace and so there's a constituency that develops; government will be there with that service. And so its driven... Those two sectors are driven by market functions. The nonprofit . . .nonprofit sector is driven not by markets but by good will and philanthropy and the desires of the individuals organizing it. Its a different direction, a different flow. And so the point that Dr. Payton made about mission, I think, is central to the whole debate, and that is the definition of mission. Government is adrift. The private businesses are also having mission difficulties because of the changing economy and the world, global economic forces, etc. And so that's a tough debate going on. And the mission of nonprofit homes...I don't know why I keep saying nonprofit homes...but nonprofit organizations is very, very tricky because everybody looks to you guys to catch everything that's left in between. And that's a very difficult type of situation. So how about that for an answer, Ed. Was that all right? Blews: That sounds interesting to me. I'd like to know what Ms. Work's reaction is to that speaking for New Detroit. Is your mission defined by what others don't do and, therefore, you do? You mentioned when we talked about values, you talked about service as the value that the nonprofit sector represents. 23 �Work: New Detroit tries to go along with what its original mission was. And I'd like to take into account here many of the comments I've heard. When Jan said that the nonprofits are the architects and practitioners, perhaps, of moral doings, I was taken back to had you asked me, I was going to say perhaps nonprofits are both the stimulator and the implementor of good deeds. Now New Detroit's mission is, of course, to try and ensure that the poor and the disadvantaged have a voice in what occurs to them and that they. . .their human needs are well taken care of. But what Herb said earlier, I think, really applies here, too. Nonprofits depend often on where they get their money from. New Detroit gets a lot of business /corporate funding, but we have also had many, many grants that were government funded. And, I think, depending upon where your funding comes from, often you have to lean a little more toward the values and the practices of the sector that gives you the funding. Our mission, I would say, is to be a stimulator and a practitioner o f good deeds . However, the business sector, who gives us a lot of funding and I think this is a good thing, is making sure that we become more businesslike and more effective in what we do. The government sector, when we have their costs of funding, wants us to be, obviously, a little more political depending upon where the funding is coming from, and also has a very different kind of bureaucratic view of how you spend your funds. So I would say that I think the nonprofit sector, indeed, has its own mission, but it is often one cannot separate the 3 and how one gets its funding and who funds you. Blews: All right. Senator Vaughn, we've talked about values and we've talked about the mission of the nonprofit sector. As a Senator, how important do you consider those values and that mission to be? Vaughn: I consider them to be extremely, but I'm more confused now than ever. I have a constituency here and back home and so I'm constantly pulled in all directions. If you noted when you asked me the original question, I said nonprofit is good for all. Its the first thing that came in my mind. And then I had a little notation, though. Things held in common. It doesn't benefit the left or the right. I should rise above my own ethnicity or political persuasion and do what is right. And I find that in listening here to all of you, I want to be reelected and I consider that as one of my missions — and we talked about mission — and yet I want to be liked and I want to be loved and I want to do what is right, so I 'm torn between the forces, but I never lose sight of the fact of why I'm here. I'm here to help for all, for a people and to rise above my own ethnicity and my own political persuasion and try to say, "What would benefit society much better?" So the mission is clear, I think, but I am not clear in my own narrowness. 24 �Slews: Senator, you raise a very important and a new point, and that is that in order for a Legislator to serve that public good or that good for all that you described, that Legislator also must be reelected from time to time. This, after all, is a democratic system. Representative Kosteva, with your constituency, is there a value placed on the nonprofit sector on the kinds of missions that we've described such that you can, as a Legislator, be a proponent of the nonprofit sector and still be reelected? Kosteva; Clearly, because many of the purposes that the nonprofit sector and the governmental sector strive to achieve are so similar. The benefit of all, the public improvement, the ability to advance human potential, to respect the diversity of our nature and of our culture and institutions, I think that's very easily done. The beauty of the nonprofit sector, in my eyes, is that it allows the individual choice to be made. The individual choice on the part of individuals to be able to pursue the nonprofit contributions and roles and volunteerism that they individually choose to participate in. It allows them to advocate for those particular causes, and with that advocacy and that participation and that choice comes a commitment to those causes. And so I think its one of the fullest expressions of the participatory democracy that Jefferson brought to this country. So clearly, to the degree that the government sometimes deals with the collective good, the nonprofit sector, I think, their well-defined mission at the present time, on a more individual basis, I believe is more well-defined than the governmental sector and the business sector as it comes to social concerns. I think they're very, very compatible with constituent concerns as an elected official. Blews: Dr. Mawby, you're on the funding side as the President and Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, of the Kellogg Foundation. Are the values that you have heard and the missions that you have heard worthy of your support? Are they the kinds of values and the kinds of missions that do warrant the support from a foundation such as yours? Mawby: Well, we, as a grant-making foundation, of course, work very closely and share, in general, the values of the nonprofit sector. Under laws established by legislative groups at the state and federal level, the nonprofit sector is defined and we, as grant makers, have the opportunity of giving funds to nonprofit institutions and organizations and to all of the units of government. So its very often a collaboration and you have to say that, as you look at society over the past 10, 20, 30 and 40 decades, the role of the various sectors continue to be dynamic and evolutionary. We passed federal legislation with funding which provides for positions labeled volunteer which are paid. And that, you know, results in some 25 �confusion. So its an evolutionary process. Simplistically, it seems to me, the nonprofit sector represents all of those institutions, organizations, and programs which include private initiative for the public good. And certainly the kinds of values that have been described on the cards and in the discussion are certainly consistent with the kind of a mission that we see as the particular role of grant makers in the whole collage. Slews: Very good. How. . .How well does business and how well does the government sector understand the nonprofit sector, let's say on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being low level of understanding and 5 being a high level of understanding, Mrs. Miller, as a former State Legislator yourself, how would you rate the understanding of the government sector and how a leader in government, in the executive branch, how well does government understand the nonprofit sector? Miller: "I'm not certain it understands it very well at all. I would put that on a rather low side in terms of maybe a 2. Just looking at it from my current position, and even having been a community leader and volunteer in my own community, I find that government has a very difficult time being sensitive to human needs and to human value, and I think that's one of the frustrations that I feel in dealing with the governmental system now as on the administrative side as opposed to the legislative side, because we can become too isolated there from what the needs of the community are and then to better provide the leadership that I believe is needed from the government sector. Because as people have said around in several different ways as we have talked this morning, that government and business provide the direction, divide the impetus, the influence as to how a nonprofit may go. And if we don't have the leadership and the understanding of the purpose of the nonprofit, we're not able to provide the leadership that's needed. And, I guess, that's what I'm hoping in terms of my role as the relatively new kid on the block in terms of the administration of government, that we can bring more sensitivity to that. Blews: Mr. Cox, from a business perspective, same scale, how well does business understand the nonprofit sector? Cox: I think the business community understands the nonprofit sector very well. Each business organization certainly recognizes their own corporate responsibility to the nonprofit sector. And that's limited by their own personal resources, obviously, and as you go through a time much like we're in today, the amount of resources available for distribution becomes limited. And, you know, they have the same compassion and the same social concerns that all of us have. But its a matter of meeting the payroll or donating to nonprofit 26 �organizations. And their obligation, obviously, is to meet the payroll as best they can. But, no, they understand very well. There's a concern about how much of the tax dollar should be devoted to that as well. And you can't do both. You can't continue to raise taxes and then continue to expect the corporate..-the business community to find the means to solve all of the problems. Bianco: Ed, can I take a contrary view to that? Slews: Sure. Bianco: My good friend, E.L., who has always been a good contributor to the museum, it may be over after this comment. . .From my perspective and the years I spent in business, and certainly E.L. and had many, many years of exchanges together, I would say that business in the '90's is going to continue its challenge of down-sizing, right-sizing, whatever the term is going to be. As that continues, I see the corporate sector having less and less of the executive time and staff time available for volunteerism. I think the pressures of the marketplace on our corporate structure are so severe at this point, and will continue to get more challenging in a global competitive environment. And that' s one of the reasons I raised the point I did before with Jan about the difference between the European system and our's, because I think we may have a separate discussion about that one sometime. But I think the corporate sector is going to be able to do less. I agree with you, E.L. Like all the rest of us, corporate executives are sensitive human beings, in many cases not all. Like all the rest of society, and will take some personal interest and follow through in the nonprofit sector. But I also think we're going to see such a great pressure on profits — we're already seeing it — and I think that will continue through the '90's to the point where, I don't know what the current numbers are, Russ, but it seems to me the last conference board report I read, corporate contributions were 5 or 6 per cent, something like that, of the total. Mawby: That's correct. Bianco: And then foundations were another 5 or 6 per cent. So even at this point, if the corporations make up 5 or 6 per cent of the total giving pot, and that averages out at 1.6 per cent or -some number like that of pre-tax profits, if I remember that number correctly also, that's a fairly small contribution out of the profits of the corporations. And if they're going to be under competitive pressure for new plant investment, for new equipment investment, they're going to have to make a simple choice. Do I give the money away, or do I reinvest in a new plant or a piece of equipment or something like that? And my point is that in the competitive, non-oligopolistic, It's a battle. 27 �non-monopoly market that the United States now finds itself competing in, the decisions, I think, are more and more going to tend toward, "Our basic job is to provide employment. Our job is to provide products and services for this country, and more of our money has got to go in that direction." So I think there's caring there. I think there are some wonderful people to be reached. But I think the challenge to the nonprofits is going to be tremendous to make their case in a very competitive, very sensible way, because I think the corporate pot is going to be smaller both in terms of people as well as money. Kostielney: Ed. Blews: Part of making that case is to understand what impact the nonprofit sector has within a state such as Michigan. And we have with us a scholar, Dr. Mark Wilson, who is the Director _of the nonprofit Michigan Project at MSU and who has been "conducting the first study of the nonprofit sector within our state. Dr. Wilson, to bring this to a sense of closure in this identification panel, what can you tell us about the impact and what do you know so far about the size of the nonprofit sector in the State of Michigan? Wilson: I think the reason I said that it was invisible was the reaction of being a researcher trying to find information on nonprofits. Its very hard to even find out where it is and how big it is. So the impact of nonprofits is very, verydifficult to gauge because we don't have a clear idea of what they do or how much they do or even where they operate. We can. . .To give you an example, we find about 3,000 nonprofit organizations in the state that employ someone, and they employ about a quarter of a million workers, a little more than 5 per cent of the workforce. And that's almost easy to find out about. It was, compared to the rest of the nonprofit sector, that was easy. But it made you think about what else is the nonprofit sector doing? Well there are another 20 or 30,000 nonprofits in the state that have perhaps been registered or perhaps taken on charges or have organized themselves formally, and so that's another level of nonprofit action. And then we did a case study of Calhoun County and found there were 5 to 10 nonprofits that didn't even register, that didn't even recognize themselves in a formal way. The nonprofit sector tends to be invisible. We can't see it. We can see the organizations that employ someone. We can find the organizations that have a very formal, or legal, background but what about all the community groups that do contribute something, that do offer something to the quality of life, that are forgotten. The small social groups, the small environmental groups. Music groups. Care groups. They exist — are invisible. They slip through the cracks. So I can say quite confidently that we have a quarter million 28 �employees in Michigan in 1990, that nonprofit organizations are generating far more employment growth than perhaps you would expect, they're about 5 per cent of the sector, but they're about 10 or 15 per cent of all the new jobs in Michigan. But beyond that, that's just really the visible, formal nonprofit sector. The invisible nonprofit sector is equally important, but we just can't get a clear idea of what it is and where it is. Blews: Mr. Anderson, from your perspective with the Detroit Urban League, what's your reaction to all of this? Anderson; Well I think its unfortunate sometimes that we do appear to be invisible, because I think the nonprofits, Father Cunningham, we've been making wine out of water for a long time. We know how to take 100 pennies and turn it into 101 pennies. I think government... we' re the organizations that take, get the jnaximum results out of the minimum dollars. Our budgets are scrutinized by foundations and government entities and things are cut away because they think its too expensive. And so we are making extreme contributions in our communities with minimum resources. I think nonprofits are a much better place sometimes for programs and activities to take place than they are in government entities. Sometimes you see, yes, I think sometimes there are too many nonprofits. And I think sometimes its too easy to become a nonprofit. But at the same time, those nonprofits that are around like the Urban League or New Detroit or what-have-you or Focus Hope, we are making tremendous contributions in our communities. We are turning things around and in business, if the other two sectors look at us a little more closely, I think we all could benefit in our communities much better than what we do. Blews: And that really leads us into Stage 2 of our discussion which is talking about the relationship of the 3 sectors. But before we jump to that, we would like to invite anybody from the audience, if you would like to dive into the dialogue, this is an opportunity for you to do so. And please identify yourself and your organization. Young: Good morning. I'm Leonard Young. I represent the Michigan Ecumenical Forum on the Nonprofit Forum Board. I have a rather specific question that I want to ask about identity. Jfow we've been talking all morning and there seems to be some general agreement around the table about what identifies a nonprofit. But in my experience and in many of our experiences in nonprofit organizations, that consensus seems to break down when you come to the practical level, particularly in the relationship between government entities and agencies and nonprofits, and what actually defines a nonprofit. Let me give you several examples of what I mean. 29 �There's one set of criteria for the IRS to determine whether an organization is nonprofit. There is an entirely different set of criteria that the U.S. Postal Service uses to determine if an organization is nonprofit and can use bulk mailing privileges. In the State of Michigan there is an entirely different set to determine whether you are exempt from sales tax or property tax in different areas. And yet again in the Attorney General's office there is an entirely separate set of criteria used to determine whether you have to apply for a charitable solicitation license or not. For a lot of organizations, especially small, locally based ones like Mr. Wilson was talking about a minute ago, considerable hardship is wreaked on those organizations in trying to sort out how all of the different entities of government and agencies look at and define nonprofit organizations. I would be interested in the Attorney General's office commenting a little on that from their point of view and any of the others who see how we jnight be able to get some kind of a consistent micro definition of what nonprofit organizations are, and as we began when Representative Bandstra talked about being accountable, a single way of doing that so that people know how they may respond to inquiries and to be appropriately judged and scrutinized as Mr. Anderson was saying. We need some single set of criteria for determining those. Blews: Mr. Hoffecker, you're the Assistant Attorney General with the Charitable Trust Department in the Attorney General's office. Your reaction. Hoffecker; Well, its a good question and one I, frankly, welcome. We view the nonprofit sector as a method by which the tremendous social energy that we have in this country can be channelled and moved into doing the virtuous, good things that we've all mentioned this morning. Government, in my view, and strictly my view, should be as unintrusive as possible. I think we have a duty to guard the public against fraud, because there is charitable fraud — it does exist. So you need some standard and some mechanism to deal with fraud. Beyond that, in my view, there shouldn't be any exemptions. The fact that some organization is religious in nature, and we have this concept of separation of church and state, that should not by itself exempt the organization from letting the government know that it is out there in a nonprofit charitable function, how much money its taking in and how much its spending. X3overnment shouldn't say you have to take in, if you take in this much, you have to spend that much on your charitable purpose. That's going to be a decision for the public. If the public has access to information about the nonprofit sector, what they're doing with their income, making 101 pennies out of 100 pennies, people, I think, can make reasonable decisions on where to spend their money or, as money gets tight, more importantly, spend their time by 30 �volunteering with an organization, and make the whole process a lot better. The current statutory scheme, I think, started out as a governmental way to kind of nurture nonprofits. Okay, we'll make them tax exempt. We'll give them a break on certain kinds of property. To encourage people to make donations to certain kinds of charities, they get a tax deduction against their income taxes for making a donation. Well government should nurture good works that way. On the regulatory side, and that's where I come as a regulator, we need to protect the public from fraud and provide a mechanism for information for the public so that they can make decisions on what to do with their time and money without regard to whether the organization is a church, a school, a United Way entity, or any other kind of nonprofit organization. Blews: Do we need a more consistent legal definition across the various units of government of what a nonprofit is? Hof fecken Well, I guess inconsistency is a hallmark of government, but yeah, I think we need some basic tenets that every body can look to and I know at our level, with the Charitable Solicitation Act, we look to the 501C3 status of the Internal Revenue Service. So we try to be consistent with them. We're trying to make our organization operate on the 990 form with the IRS. That makes it easier for organizations. One document. If we're all looking at the same document, it makes it easier for the organization, it makes it easier for the public, and we' re all looking at the same numbers. Arrangement of the numbers on a form can change peoples' perceptions about organizations. In terms of the Postal Service, I'm not sure what their regulations are, but I'm sure, being a 501C3 is a big part of it. If we focus on that as the one constant, then I think we can deal with the other things. Blews: At this point, then, we will take a break. We will reconvene, we will try to reconvene by 10:45, so please be quick and brief. (Break) 31 �(Resumed Summit; - 10:56 a.m.) Blews; ...public here. I'd like to say a word to our panel and then I'll say a word as the program itself begins again. And thank you very much. You've done a very good job in the first stage here of helping us to set the foundation and to deal with some issues of identity. Our goal now, at the second and third stages, is really to allow the discussion to become much more free-wheeling. And please forgive me, with the lights and all, sometimes I don't catch the signals that come from you. So feel free to wave your card or scream and yell and we'll try to get a chance to recognize everyone. But do feel free to just jump in freely in the discussion as we go. And my role, rather than to pull you by the reins will be, when necessary, to perhaps rein things in just a...just a touch. Yes, that's correct. And during the discussion, if you feel jreal compelled to go to the mike, even if its not a point where we've invited that, you may and we'll try to get to you as quickly as we can, and then we will also provide an opportunity at the end for audience participation at that point. Yes, Maryellen. Lewis; And I believe we may go on past Blews Yes. In fact, we may go closer to 12:30. Lunch is behind me. We'll announce that again in the room next door. We'll announce that again at the appropriate time. At this point then we'll return to the cameras. slightly? In the first stage of our session today, we've had really a marvelous discussion about the identity of the nonprofit sector and perhaps some lack of identity or some confusion about identity. Who are we? What are we? What does that matter in terms of the relationship between the 3 sectors -government, business and the nonprofit sector — that are represented around this table before us? At this point we're going to become a bit less structured in our dialogue. We have here a panel of persons who are very distinguished leaders and, certainly, feel very freely, as they should, to speak their minds, and we're going to give them the opportunity to do that in this next session, and then in the third session. Stage 2 of our discussion, though, deals with relationships. The government/business/nonprofit partnership, the question of whether there is such a partnership, whether there should be such a partnership. How is it changing, particularly in these difficult fiscal times and these difficult economic days? 32 �What are the issues, the tensions and the ramifications? Having talked about the identity...the identity of the nonprofit sector, we now want to examine that in the context of these very, very important relationships. One of the people at our table here who certainly deals day in and day out with that kind of relationship is Mr. Robert Ivory/ the President of the United Way of Michigan. Mr. Ivory, of course, is representing and serving through his organization, serving community organizations. The nonprofit sector, in its attempt to secure support and funding in dealing in that process very closely with the business community or the for-profit sector. Mr. Ivory/ how would you assess the current relationship between the business community and the nonprofit sector? Is it a good relationship? Is it a bad relationship? Ivory: jEs this in the context of last night's NIGHTLINE? If you had a chance to see that last night, you certainly saw some pros and cons about the historical relationship between United Way and the business community. That has been a strong relationship over the years. United Ways have had, in some ways, a very well kept gift and benefit in terms of philanthropy. In a sense, when you talk about both workplace solicitation and payroll deduction, when you put those 2 things together, that yields, usually, people talk about that being a 9 to 10 times yield over asking someone for an individual gift at any given moment in time. So the notion of having access to the workplace and to employees for solicitation and coupling that with payroll deduction has been a very strong element of the United Way system. It also is incumbent upon United Way, in order to encourage that relationship and to maintain that, is to take a look at the trust that United Ways bring to the business community and to the community at large. In terms of the package of services that it brings to the workplace, and that has...therein is a major controversy today within the United Way system, even outside of < the most recent news events about the national president, there has been a major controversy within the United Way system in the last 2 or 3 years around the whole notion of choice and opening up the number of agencies that are brought into the United Way system, into the workplace. And that companies, and particularly again in the public sector, have asked that the number of agencies, the number of charities represented, for instance, in an organization like United Way, in fact, not be limited to a few select organizations but, in fact, be opened to a much broader base of charitable organizations. The phenomenon is in this country as someone alluded to earlier that, in fact, we've had just an explosion of nonprofits in this country since the '60's. And there are more and more agencies who are looking to the workplace, for instance, as the method of increasing 33 �their funding. And so the pressure on United Ways today is, "What type of package do you take to the workplace to have continued credibility with the business community that you're offering a product that, in fact, is not limited to a few select agencies but, in fact, brings in a package of services that meet the broadest ray of community good. Its interesting, in my view, one of the characteristics that we. . .that make us somewhat invisible that we need to, in fact, market is one of the hallmark characteristics of the nonprofit sector is, in fact, the volunteer force. And I've always been impressed to hear George Romney talk about that volunteer commitment and the ownership, whether we talk about it as the participatory principle of people becoming involved in our community issues remains a major issue for United Ways to continue working with the business community for that type of leadership and commitment to some of the community issues. So, in short, one of the things that's happening to us within the United Way system is to continue to look at that relationship that we have with the business community in terms of presenting a package of services, a benefit that, in fact, benefits a much broader community base than a few select organizations. Slews: Mr. Cantrell, you...you represent volunteer agencies. Mr. Ivory has talked about the important role of volunteer ism. How does that relationship between the 3 sectors affect the volunteer activity in this society? Cantrell It affects it in a very positive way. One of the things I would like to address before answering your question is the whole point of where human services, private sector, came from — this whole idea of human services. It started with people before we had any programs, any professionals, we had volunteers who saw a problem and went out and tried to do something to cure or aid in that particular situation. One of the things I see that that whole pioneer spirit is somewhat dying. And its dying under the auspices of existing organizations, often times, in that the volunteer sees a problem and tries to bring their problem forward. There seems to be now territories among agencies and if its working with children, then you're touching upon some child serving agencies. If its dealing with the homeless, some existing organizations see it. Whether or not they are behind that particular attempt to start an organization or to carry some -special type of service through has a profound impact on whether or not that program will ever get off the ground. And I see that dying in some of the communities I'm working with. As people bring forth programs, they are actually being smothered under the weight of existing programs who are going to be. . .see them as contenders for dollars. And I just wanted to bring that forth and so that's something we really need to deal with. 34 �I think in terms of the overall relationship from a corporate standpoint, we hear often times corporations talking about being a good corporate neighbor. But often times when confronted with, "What exactly do you mean by that and what exactly. . .what type of activities will you involve yourself in to...to prove that?" Often times, you'll get a...not the type of answer you may be looking for. In terms of government, not to be a complainer or anything but they tend to kill creativity. One of the things that I see that is hurting nonprofits right now is the fact that creativity is being smothered under the weight of paperwork, under the weight of restrictions and that type of thinq.l And I get a lot of people in from Western Michigan University who are graduating from the field of Social Work and they come in and they really want to change the world. And its really nice to see that. "I'm graduating next year. I'm gonna go out and I'm gonna have an impact on this." To talk with those people a year later or 2 years later and see that they've been...I'm "thinking what's the right word I want here...what -i~ want.. .that they've been basically.. .all their creativity, all their energy has been somewhat^ subdued and now put away. ••£• think that's a big problem. (l think that we really need to open up human services to the standpoint that when people come in, if they have creative ideas, there is a forum for them to bring those ideas forward. In cases where the true sense of volunteer ism, which is going out and people helping people and being able to identify a need and carrying that through rather than going out and having to join an existing agency. One other point. We talk about formal volunteerism and that's working with agencies that exist. There's a large contingency of informal volunteerism that goes on and that really needs to be gauged more. And I know that's the invisible thing that you were talking about, Mark. But we really need to find out what is going on therej I know that churches are involved. I know that in my community, just in my Block Clubs, all of the things that they're doing to deal with crime and a lot of other things that are going on. Its not being gauged and not being seen as that overall system. I think a big part of the activities are happening there. But to grow from a Block Club to a new founded organization with funding is something that doesn't occur very easily because of existing agencies. X We need to figure out a way within this partnership to not only create a network whereby these things...these issues can come to a head and people can speak to them, but also an -opportunity for those organizations to somehow have a survival clause in there somewhere, that they may be pushed forward to the point of developing and starting new agencies. And at this time in our history, especially here in.Michigan, we need that type of pioneer spirit more than ever! And I don't see this being... 35 �Blews: Reactions to that. Jan? Gallagher; I'd like to talk for a minute about some national and state trends that, I think, are going to affect the development of government/business/nonprofit partnerships over the next 10 years. Its not, I think, going to be news to anybody in this room, but I think it might be helpful to remind us all. The President's budget proposal, factored out over the next 5 years, is projecting declines in federal spending for for education and training, for social services transportation, for community and regional development. The only thing that's projected to grow in the President's budget is medical care, federal spending for medical care. The most recent, valid data on what's happening at the state level comes from a mid-December survey by the National Conference of State Legislatures. At that point, 30 states were receiving less revenue than they needed to balance their budget. More Jthan half the states were reporting expenditures for entitlement programs or education or both at a higher rate than budgeted. There were very few state reserves left because most of the states had spent them in 1991. There is an increased demand for social services, and a lot of states are cutting aid to local government as one way of balancing their budgets. Its a terrible picture. But it also is going to force substantial changes in how we deliver services, and its going to force changes in the partnerships. There's not going to be federal money. There's not going to be state money. It looks like there's not going to be local money in the short run. Someone is going to have to pick up the slack, and only nonprofit organizations are left. And that's going to, I think, force nonprofits to do exactly the things that Mr. Cantrell, I think, if I got the name from this.. .that's right. . .was just talking about and that is find new approaches to deliveries of services, to decategorize existing programs, to look at innovative, creative, community-based solutions to problems. Blews: Councilman Benavides, from a local government standpoint, what's your reaction? Are you seeing the same trend occurring there? And how do you see the partnership shaping up? Benavides Well, first of all I think that we have a tremendous job in trying to educate government as to what our actually nonprofit organizations are. I see the...there is various types of nonprofit. In terms of services, those that provide the traditional services that are commonly known to everyone, and then there is the others that are non-traditional where we take the people as we are. The problems, I think, that we have sometimes when we try to get grants and things of that kind, the first word that comes up is "duplication." You're duplicating with so-and-so. You're duplicating with this other person. And what. . .what they need to know, they need to 36 �get educated as to exactly what it is that that agency does and why. And so that. . .it seems to me like this type of forum has a tremendous job, along with us, to try to educate that particular sector. I just wanted to say a little bit about the United Way politics in terms of opening it up to everyone, I've been an agency director for 22 years in Lansing and I have seen many people come and go. And I know that at one time we had like maybe no more than 10 or 15 agencies. Today we got like 100. That's fine. The more, the merrier. I think competition is good. I used to be a grocery clerk and they used to tell me that the best thing to do is to have someone across the street that would give you competition. But, you know, one of the things that the designations, I don't know that he mentioned it, the agency designation where you designate who do you want that particular donation to go to. I have been quite concerned about that. I got my numbers from the local United Way and they were increased a little bit ^rom the last time. But I think, you know, that deep in the living rooms or bedrooms or wherever these people are making those decisions, there seem to be a tendency, if they don't know anything about your agency, they don't know anything about what you do, or they...they seem to designate that and I can see a lot of these designations going to a block type of agencies in this community. And I think that if, in fact, we're gonna look at all of those as agency designations should be one. Let me say that government, I think, that its always has a tendency, and being an elected official for 10 years in the City of Lansing, I 'm an advocate of human services. I work for one and I truly believe that this is where we gotta go. But I think, you know, we have the tendency to leave the human services, to leave our drugs and crime and health services to the United Way, to the foundations, to "let George do it" type of attitude. I have always advocated that we need to be responsible, that the city government, county government, and state government needs to be responsible and we need to set aside, just like we set aside for everything else, we need to set aside dollars that are gonna go to nonprofit organizations that are providing the services to this community. I have to believe that if we can educate 'em and we can get 'em jobs and we can get 'em the help they need, the whole economic and social quality of life in our community will change. Blews: Dr. Mawby. Mawby: Well, I find it useful from time to time to remind myself of sort of a fundamental interrelationship or interdependence of these three sectors. That, in fact, the governmental and the nonprofit sectors are fully dependent for their resources upon the vitality, the success if you please, of the other sector - business. And its only as business is successful that government can generate its resources. Its only as business 37 �is successful that employees then have the where-with-all — 85 per cent or so of giving is by individuals. Its not by corporations and its not by foundations, its by individuals. And so the vitality, the success of all of society depends upon that generating force. I was...And so public policy then in effect decides how those resources are going to be mobilized to serve the public good. We tax to do certain things. And in those decisions, we can provide incentives or disincentives for voluntary giving. And so as an individual then, part of my contribution to society at large is through the taxes I pay and part of it through the charity, the giving sector. I was intrigued earlier when we had our flash cards, how often the word "community" came up. And I've been in my public remarks been talking about the 1990's as the decade of the community, because it seems to me for several decades we've been shifting responsibility to higher and higher levels, to Lansing and then to Washington, saying that the _federal government or the state government ought to do these things. I think society in this period now is becoming somewhat disenchanted. We've poured massive resources into governmental efforts and I think there's been some degree of frustration and dissatisfaction with the consequences. And increasingly I hear Washington saying about, "That's the state's responsibility," and Lansing saying, "That's really, you know, the county, the city, the community's responsibility." Now there's going to be a very awkward transition here in public policy of reallocating the resources to do the job. But if that's the direction that American society is really moving, then I subscribe fully to that because I think at the community level we're able to respond most effectively to community needs. Then we've got an awkward period of transition where responsibility is being shifted, the resources have not yet been reallocated, but I think it represents, again, that interrelationship of these 3 components of the larger picture. Blews; Mr. Hoffecker. Hoffecker: I. think that's an excellent point. The nonprofit sector can do something that government and business can't do and that's, in my opinion, react quickly to changing social needs. One of my frustrations in government with one of the other hats that I wear in the office is that we're always reacting to something after the problem and the harm has occurred in ...that's in my efforts in the Consumer Protection area. Very seldom are we fortunate enough to get people with enough knowledge so they avoid the problem. The problem happens. They come to government. Nonprofits are...can have the chance to be proactive. Look ahead. Sense what's going on and then try to deal with it. Government and business can try to facilitate that by allowing access to the workplace and payroll deduction to fund programs, to guard against fraud in 38 �going out and soliciting money and making information available to potential donors. But, really, the...especially in the current era, it strikes me that the most dynamic of the 3 dynamic forces we're talking about is the nonprofit area. Aaron's work, the emphasis on getting people involved because money. , .there's less money so you need. . .you can.. .you can solve some of the money shortages with people power.. .the social energy that I mentioned earlier, that our nation with its cultural and racial and ethnic diversity, we just have all this stuff going for us if we can somehow channel it into doing public good that so many of us held up when we went around with our word game. Blews: Mrs. Upjohn, you're both a business person, a business leader, and a community leader. What do you think about this? Upjohn: Well, I support what you say very strongly because I think that the nonprofit sector is the only game in town that can take risks. We need new kinds of solutions for some of these problems. We need more collaborative efforts where agencies come together. Each of them may be doing what they do best, and working together to bring social energy to the problems that beset us. And for government its too ponderous and for the business community it is really not their function. But that's where our power and our ability to set the agenda comes, I feel. Blews: We then do go to the question of who pays. And earlier in the discussion there was a reference made to the fact that the primary — the first responsibility of the business community is to its employees and to their benefits and compensation. And then, of course, there's the issue of shareholders in large corporations. Mr. Roehrig, you represent a part of the labor community. From your perspective, how should business balance its obligation to its employees and does it have an obligation to the broader community through the nonprofit sector in the use of its resources? Roehrig; You've probably stuck upon the essence of a discussion I assume we're going to have later on, it was mentioned earlier, donor option and that entire...that...that phraseology that seems to apply and have every nonprofit that goes into the workplace and attempts to "solicit funding". That is one of the major difficulties now on whether or not its appropriate for everyone to be treated the same in their efforts. Is there a special partnership for certain individuals, whether they be groups of agencies or attractive agencies, that seem to have the public concern at the present time such as funding for AIDS, etc., to be specific? Do the employers, therefore, have a responsibility to allow everyone the same opportunity to solicit those funds? Or is there a mechanism internally where the donors, the individuals, the labor force that I 39 �represent, is there another way that they should be involved, they being the employees, to determine which agencies are going to "stand outside the plant gate with a tin cup1*? And that takes us, if I could take us into that, that's the essence of business and labor and nonprofit having a coalition many years ago to limit the number of solicitations. That was the reason for putting together federations that would come in and make one presentation at one time of the year. That's our concern now as labor leaders in that we know our members and our employees that we represent are good, community-based, hard working individuals; but their budgets are stressed just like every corporation and every business. Their difficulty with buying bread and supplies and paying tuition and paying for things for their children and their families is just as difficult as corporate Michigan or corporate America to balance its budget. So when they're given the option to contribute, if they' re beset upon by too many requests for Donations, the tendency is to turn the set off and not listen any more at all and don't contribute period. And that's ...that's the complaint we're getting in our...as labor individuals, that there is an increase in the number of solicitations — both through direct contact and in the workplace. And that creates a whole new set of problems for us in our partnership with business and industry here in Michigan. Blews: Reactions to that from the nonprofit sector. Anderson: I want to make a quick response, because I think it probably raises one question that all of us ought to think about. Knowing our options when you talk about that in the United Way, for example, isn't really just a donor convenience. Because if you feel strongly enough about the Detroit Urban League or the Urban League, and we've had discussions nationally, you could write a check directly to me and it will be tax deductible and I don't need a third party to field that money to me. So if you're talking about donor options, you may really be talking about donor conveniences and I think he's right, that you really just open up a Pandora's box and have people inundated, because a lot of us get mail all the time directly from people soliciting funds and then I see the United Way, for example, and others who put out money as people who really have taken some time to study what the issues are and try to prioritize funding those needs in a community, and not just letting it run all over the place. So I would think that somehow or another, if you have all of a sudden 300 entities seeking money in this corporation, you really are talking about donor conveniences as opposed to donor options. Blews: Mrs. Miller. 40 Mr. Anderson? �Miller: I'd like to build on some things that everybody has said here because I think when we're talking about donor options or donor conveniences, we're talking. . .we're really talking about a problem that I think we have across the board in terms of looking at what Mrs. Upjohn said about collaboration, what Jan said about creativity, what Mr. Mawby said about community, I think we've got to look at cooperation, we've got to look at communication, we've got to look at coordination, and they can't be just nice little concepts that we sit here and talk about on the table. I mean, we've got to go out and actively pursue those relations and develop that communication so that there isn't the inundation with donations, that there isn't the duplication of services that someone mentioned.. .mentioned here. I think that we've got to move...move forward because in a time of limited resources, whether its limited resources from the public sector or limited resources from the private sector, we're talking about money. But there's also _information, there are also people. And I think we have to begin to work together and I take this... I give you an example in the public sector in what I do in the Ombudsman's Office. I came in at the beginning of last year, and I won't give you the whole long story. But in essence, what happened in our office, we had to reprioritize, we had to refocus, we had to down-size, and as a result of what we have done, we found a new direction, a new purpose and a better service. And I think this is what this time of limited resources is all about in terms of both government, in terms of the nonprofits and in terms of the business community. And alone we can't do it, but together we have to come and do it and get it done. And I think we're being forced to do it, because its the only way we have to go now. The money's not there. Blews: Mr. Epolito. Epolito: Yeah, just very briefly, I think we've talked about a partnership that does not exist. I think we're taking steps. This is a fragmented conversation. However, this is the first steps in trying to bring that together. I think that the one thing that a partnership can do, and certainly the United Way has proven this, is to set some priorities. On my desk in my office sits about, I don't know, $15,000 or $20,000 worth of requests for funding. We set up a Corporate Giving Committee and as to where we're going to allocate our resources. At the same time, our employees are inundated with requests and I have everything from a $500 tuxedo affair evening for the Humane Society to save dogs and cats, and I'm not criticizing that because its a major priority for some people, but we have people starving. We have homeless in the streets. We, as a corporation, we, as individuals, have got to set some priorities as to what's important to us in this society. So I think this whole issue of what can the partnership do, if a partnership is created, I think the partnership could give 41 �some leadership to setting some priorities and really get to some of the bottom line issues and give some of the focus that we're lacking. Blews: Good. And that's certainly is a function of this Forum today as you note yourself. Mr. Yamanishi. Yamanishi; A comment was made about down-sizing. From the nonprofits' perspective, there have never been adequate resources, probably never will be, for all of the needs that we see. There is...the problem that we...the way in which to address problems, at least from my perspective, is not necessarily to look at where the resources are but what kind of freedoms do we have to address those resources, to address the problems that are out there, and I don't see that. . .because of this dynamic where we've at one time been closely associated with government funds, and so then you get regulated to such a jiegree, or if you start to, well, lobbying being one of those issues where you start to advocate for a certain...for certain perspectives, kind of choices that society ought to be making, we get.. .there was a lot.. .there is a period in which that was heavily prohibited from nonprofits from trying to advocate. It seems to me that in order for nonprofits to be the dynamic that I think that we have created a third sector in this country, we have to be given some opportunity. If there aren't going to be enough resources, we ought to be given the opportunity at least to think freely and to...and to feel ...and to define the problems and the issues out there. But, unfortunately, what's happening is that we are being driven and we are not driving. We are being told by the business sector or by the government sector how we should form. I mean, if you narrowed the opportunities for addressing raising money, then you are narrowing the kind of opportunities possibly that nonprofits can have to address issues as well. So to me there needs to be the relationship between government and business as one in which we need to provide more opportunity and more freedom if its not going to be possible to provide the resources to go with. We have to be given an opportunity to express ourselves and we haven't been able to do that. Blews: Dr. Clark, you bring a health discussion. Clark: And I want to build on what was just said, because certainly for the health care industry, and hospitals in particular, in Michigan and the United States, this involvement between a not-for-profit hospital and the governmental agencies that both regulate and increasingly reimburse has been an uneasy situation with tensions on both sides; and it certainly is not getting any better. If you put a little historical perspective on it, the relationship was between hospitals and 42 care perspective to the �government, with business a distance away. That is changing as well so that the triumvirate, as we are talking about it here, is not becoming increasingly interrelated. And from the hospitals' perspective, we function as nonprofit. At the same time the government regulation is so extreme that the very flexibility that we've all been talking about in meeting the needs of the local community is increasingly removed from the hospitals to be able to do that. At the same time, with the shrinking reimbursement, both from the public sector and from business, you have an increased constraint on what the abilities are for any individual institution to meet those needs — even at the best of times. I'd like to be able to take the suggest ion that was made by Judy Mi 1 ler that this Forum, and by Aaron, that this was exactly the time at which we should be most inventive. But I don't think I have a tremendous amount of sense that that is going to occur in health care as health care has come to be in the United States jtoday. If you consider, in Michigan, that besides being nonprofit with all the things that that means, that in addition to that there is over $400 million of care in charity care that's given every year — over $1 million a day — and that doesn't even count what's not being reimbursed by the mandated federal and state programs. You are talking about a situation where the squeeze is coming from both sides, and the ability to respond to that in inventive and new ways is shrinking as well because of governmental constraints and regulations. Blews: Ms. Work. Work: I'd just like to say that it appears as though the nonprofits have been given the mandate to take care of crucial problems that are growing and that are not getting smaller, and that it is truly a mandate without money. Now I understand, and we have been hearing at New Detroit, that we must coordinate, we must have collaborative efforts. I agree with that and I think the nonprofits have to coordinate and collaborate to the best of their ability. Then we hear no duplication of services. Perhaps there should be some duplication in order to cover all the problems, and I don't mean duplication that is a bad thing, but how much do we come together and collaborate and coordinate to the extent that we not fulfilling our mandate and handling all of those problems out there? Some duplication might be a good thing in order to handle all of problems. It is a very tough mandate and I agree with Herb, once again, we must be able to advocate, perhaps, in order to get some more money, in order to handle these problems that are growing, rather than going away. And I know here we're talking about what exists now, but perhaps we have to work also to try and change what exists, at least as funding from the public sector, in order to handle everything appropriately. Right now we're pitting human 43 �services and human needs against the arts. We're going to be pitting more things against each other, I think, unless we take a really good look at policy issues. Blews: Mr. Bianco. Bianco: The subject is coordination between the 3 sectors. where we are? Blews: The subject is wherever we take it. Bianco: Before I mentioned that I did not think that during the Reagan years or now even during the Bush years the federal government is doing what it can to encourage activity in the, nonprofit sector. When we heard the rhetoric in the early '80's that the private sector must do more, individuals must do more, we were reminded by Russ that the giving is largely by ^individuals. But yet during the Reagan Administration and the tax reform as all of us in this room know, the whole itemized deduction was taken away essentially for about 75 per cent of tax filers. As far as I know, about 25 per cent of the people itemize, somebody might back me up on that number. And so we took the federal incentive to give. We took the policy that said, "Its good to give. This is what we want to encourage you to do it." Government is not going to stick its fingers in the management of it, but we want to have the third sector involved in this. So during the Reagan years, that was taken away. To me, that was a complete inconsistency in the policy of you want to encourage private sector support, and then on the other hand you chop off their hand in terms of their financial where-with-all. So I never did understand that even though I'm a Republican and I voted twice for Reagan, I still don't understand it. And I voted for Bush, too. And I'm frustrated. Anyhow, you'd think I'd learn. And I voted for some other Republicans in this state, too. Now, at the state level, again I think we're doing the same thing. When we look at our state tax policy, its a complete hodge podge as all of us know, in terms of any kind of deductions for charitable gifts. We say that if you give $400 as an individual or as a couple, you can deduct $200. But its only $200 if you give to public broadcasting or education or an art organization attached to a municipality that has support of the arts, whatever that is. It is a crazy pattern. We say its all right for a corporation to take a $5,000 deduction for public -broadcasting contributions or $5,000 to a community foundation. But if you give to a hospital or if you give to an art museum and you're a corporation, you can't take that $5,000 deduction. So to our legislative associates who are here today, there was a lot of rhetoric last year in the Legislature, but nobody every took a hold of this crazy-quilt pattern. That's point number 1. Point number 2 on this is, if there's going to be cooperation and if there is going to be 44 Is that �less governmental support in the '90's, then we need some more help from the state government. Why shouldn't that deduction be raised to $500 or $1,000? Something that is truly meaningful or begins to be meaningful. And then even having done that, that's still not going to solve all the problems that Jane just talked about in the health care. We know that. But it could help a broad range of organizations. So those are some of the kinds of things that both from a moral persuasion point of view as well as a tax point of view, both our state government and federal government could retrace their steps and send the message out to this country that the third sector is important to our democracy and to solving the issues. And no substantive action is happening at the federal level or the state level. There's a lot of rhetoric. There's a lot of discussion. But nobody's got a single piece of legislation to correct those two problems, and I don't understand that. Blews: Representative Bandstra. Bandstra; Yeah, I think you're right, that we do have a hodge podge approach at the state level. I'm sure you're aware that we do have a limited tax credit in place for community foundations and part of the bill that reinvigorated that tax credit specified that we want to do a study of the way other states structure their tax incentives for charitable giving, so we recognize the problem here in Lansing. I'm not saying that we're definitely going to solve it in a fashion that will please everybody in the room, but its certainly something we ought to look at at the state level, so I would agree with you. Kosteva: I go back to Joe's point that you raised much, much earlier and that is answering the question of who delivers the results the best. If we would choose, if government makes the conscious decision to, let's say, broaden the deductibility of certain contributions, clearly that tax expenditure will cost the state government, and we will be making the conscious decision that Jan has talked about in terms of the extended pressure that state government is facing. Lois mentioned about the fact that we're pitting social services versus the arts at the present time. So if we make the conscious decision to expand the deductions and the expenditures that that can go for that will reduce the state dollars that will, therefore, go to social services so we, therefore, will be making the conscious decision that government has decided that somebody else, the nonprofit sector, will deliver these results better than the centralized state or federal government will. So I'm not certain if our society. . .our collective society of whom Rick and I and others are reflective of that as their representatives...have made that decision. I think that...I think that they're pushing us in 45 �that decision. They're pushing us toward the direction that they don't think state government is...is delivering the results very good for some of the reasons that Russ Mawby talked about, what they're telling us with their tax message that they don't want to see state government spending more money or have more money available to spend for that and so maybe they're pushing us in that direction. Its just a matter of the evolutionary process for the leaders to tax to catch up with their electors. Blews: Senator Sederburg, as a former legislator, what counsel would you offer to this...this gauntlet that has been laid down for the current Legislature? Sederburg: Well, I think we're in the midst of a rewriting of the social contract in the state of Michigan. Michigan has a history and a tradition similar to Wisconsin and Minnesota of a public that wanted public services valued, a good public infrastructure, liked high quality educational institutions, liked to fund the arts, etc. But I think we may be in the midst of a change of attitude and we may be moving more to an Indiana - Ohio type of environment in which the public says we're going to rely on the individual to make decisions and to succeed individually and we're not going to look to government to provide services, and I think that the public may be moving away from the leadership of the state. And the people around the panel and all of us probably on the bottom line feel that the government really has a role to play in providing leadership and providing some high level governmental services that we can be proud of. Joe' s point in Europe, you go to Europe and people are proud of the infrastructure of the public buildings and the public transportation systems and the public image is there. I ran into a friend of mine from Minneapolis the other day and we were talking about high taxes in Minnesota, and he said, "Yeah, we have high taxes in Minnesota but we' re proud of the park system and the road system and the infrastructure that we have." I'm afraid that's changing in Michigan and the message that Jim Kosteva and Rick Bandstra and others are getting from their public is that they're facing economic pressures and we don't care about public services as we're having such a difficult time making it in our own family situation. And that's very frustrating and I chuckle and mention a big pitch for tax credits, you know, a lot of people believe these are tax expenditures. That it is really just another way of the state giving direct aid to the institutions, and its just going to drive the state budget further into debt and accelerate this social rewriting of the social contract. So I'm afraid that its going to be a tough time ahead until the public really resolves in their own minds the level of public services that they really want out of the state government. I think the federal level has done a tremendous disservice to us in Michigan in that the public 46 �has gotten used to having their cake and eating it, too, and just it on the credit card for the national debt. And so in the same paper you can read about Congress passing a tax reduction bill and at the same time talking about passing mandatory health care insurance for everybody and it'll just drive the national deficit further and higher and higher. Well, we don't have that liberty at the state level, but the public thinks we do. So the public is going to write to Jim Kosteva and say, "Gee, we want money for the arts and we want a tax cut next week, too, while you're at it." And they'll be totally inconsistent to them because that's exactly what their Congressmen are telling them that they're going to deliver in the next election. They're going to give them national health care insurance and they're going to cut their taxes. So why can't we at the state level give money for the arts and cut our taxes? Sounds reasonable to me and I'm going to write a letter to the legislators. Blews: We'll provide the legislators' addresses to you. Sederburg: Very good. Blews: Shifting to a national perspective, Ms. Gallagher. Gallagher: Well, first let me assure you that Michigan is not alone in having a confused approach to incentives, for charitable giving. I commend to all of you Virginia's sales tax exemption system which is one of the most complicated I have ever seen. But I'm disturbed by what I'm seeing around the country as I monitor tax challenges to nonprofits. And what I'm seeing goes back to what we were discussing in the first part of the session which is a fundamental lack of identity within the nonprofit sector. Blews: And now we're talking about tax challenges not tax incentives, an important bridge in the conversation here. Gallagher: Well, let me bridge it a little better then. I mean a property tax exemption is an incentive. It's not an incentive to charitable giving but its an incentive to the charitable organization to carry out its purposes; similarly a sales tax exemption I would put generally within that framework. Blews: Good. Gallagher: Two weeks ago, I'm told, the tax assessor's office for Lincoln, Nebraska, was out with tape measures measuring the square footage of every day care center in every church basement in Lincoln. The tax assessor was quoted in the newspaper as saying, "Child care is not charitable unless its free. Further, child care is not a religious purpose." Therefore, he apparently proposes to require all churches in I've waited for a long time to do that. 47 �Lincoln to pay a proportional share of the property tax on that portion of the building that's devoted to child care. The Lincoln newspaper, I'm further told, wrote an editorial commending this fellow for his innovative and creative approach to solving Lincoln's revenue problems. I don't understand this, except to say that people apparently don't — aren't seeing the value in child care, the importance of child care, the need for quality child care to preserve family structures. We haven't talked yet about your fourth sector, which I see as the family. The Alabama Legislature — House of Delegates — I'm told, 2 weeks ago repealed... voted to repeal all its charitable sales tax exemptions as part of a restructuring, taking away what they viewed as unfair tax benefits. I believe that's going to be corrected in the Alabama Senate, but I'm seeing the need for state revenue driving, and for local revenue, driving some decisions that I think are terribly unfortunate for the future of nonprofit jDrganizations. I'm seeing organizations forced to spend substantial amounts of money to defend existing tax exemptions, and I'm concerned about it. I'm also seeing on the government/business/private partnership area a fundamental exclusion of service delivery agencies from some of the dialogue that's going on. I'm told there was a conference at Wing Spread maybe a month or 6 weeks ago, I'm not sure, at which government, including the Governor's Council of State Policy Advisors and business leaders and foundation executives, sat down and talked about how to restructure delivery systems. I'm told that deliverers of social services were notable absent from that discussion. Another group that I work with is trying an experiment in Virginia to renegotiate the delivery system and when they went to talk to their state funders, they were told basically, "Go away. You do what we tell you. We don't want to hear what you think." I'm not sure how to correct these identity problems. But I think that if we don't address them pretty quickly, we're going to have some serious problems over the next 10 years. Blews: Do we see those same kinds of identity problems producing similar challenges in Michigan? Father Cunningham? Cunningham: Oh sure, but the not-for-profit organizations, the complete spectrum of even to the point of antithesis...and I remember when Focus Hope started, one of the things that bothered me tremendously was people calling us an agency. Because by definition, an agency is something that does what other people tell them to do. They act out of a contract to do something. You see us, by nature, develop guidelines for those that get their money and, therefore, they are U.C.S. agencies. That relationship, while very important maybe to certain objectives, is the death knell of the not-for-profit, highly voluntary, and what I should think of as the...those of you who like Lake St. Clair and Jefferson Avenue, .all know about 48 �the fish fly. He comes in there and gets under your car tires and we crunch up several million billion of them every year. I always used to think, "That's a good idea for not-for-profit organizations. They guide themselves as fish flies. They come get something done then get out of business." And then good people like Dr. Mawby come along and say, "Hey, wait a minute. We'd like to help you, but how long are you going to be around? We're looking for some consistency." Right, Russ? And we're looking... Mawby: Cunningham: Positively. So you need some institutional stuff. And there's a struggle within an organization, both to be institutional and to be free. And let me tell you, that's a stiff one. That's where that small group of not-for-profits that are not agencies. And for that group now comes the responsibility to take this _business community over here and this government community on the other side, who obviously have failed to do something or there wouldn't be a purpose for the not-for-profit, and then you go and say, "Its their fault, business, and its their fault, government, that they don't know how important we are to their destiny." Well that's a crock. Its the responsibility of the not-for-profit organization to make partnerships with government and with business and to draw them along and to make some very important assumptions. The business community has an ethic. Now they're crooks. There are also crooks in the not-for-profit. But they have an ethic, and that ethic ought to be honored and respected, but its an ethic, a kind of fence around their business practices out of which they hope to become really rich and take care of themselves. And that's acknowledged. There's nothing wrong with that. And government, Eugene McCarthy made a good case and its government's business is to maintain the morays, not to establish morality, not to grab ideals. And after Thomas Jefferson and all that stuff God laid to rest, the purpose of government was to maintain the institution. The purpose of the not-for-profit organization is to reach for the stars. To reach for the moral possible in our time and then to integrate that with the morays lifting them up inch by inch and with the business community making them a little better, too, for the common good. Now comes this not-for-profit organization, wimping and whining, "By God, this is hard work. " Well of course it is. That's what you chose to set that at the helm. And you stand up to yourself and if you're the captain of the ship, you shouldn' t receive any pay. "Why shouldn' t you receive any pay as the captain?" (This will make me very popular.) "Why should not the captain of the ship receive any pay?" Because he is inviting in all these volunteers. Come follow me. And if he gets 75 grand a year, how can he ask all these volunteers to come in and do for nothing what he' s managing for a pretty handsome salary. We got a lot of stuff 49 �here we've got to look at. And, finally, on a very positive side, because I think we're in for some real great surprises and while, Jane, you make some good projections there, I'll bet you didn't even project what was going to happen in Europe a year and a half ago either see. So that's nice. General Motors has 5-year plans. Now, let's talk about projections. You know we have an aging population in this country that's pretty healthy, pretty healthy. And instead of those poor folks sitting down there in their condo around the swimming pool discussing in Florida, or Boca Raton to be specific, the latest and the most effective laxatives. Why, and I got this out of Dr. Frieden's paper, a nice, nice point, about educating our people on giving. When are we going to tell folks you've got to give back? When are we going to start telling them, you've had a nice life — time to give back? And to give back as a fine government representative. You don't have to go out from GM and now become a consultant and _make $500,000 a year. You've got enough to take care of you for a while. Come on, give back. I had a guy come in the other day and his wife finally said, convinced him last year, time to give back. I have a major doer. He's in at 7:30 every morning, setting the discipline for the entire organization because he's a good guy and wants to give back, and he figures at 65 he's got 10 years to give back. We have a tremendously developing population in this country of people who've been around the block a few times who are our greatest treasure. Come and give back! And we're sitting around here discussing laws and a lot of other stuff. Frankly, I think we've got to get busy as nonprofits and forgive our government people and our business people because that's why we're here. I have no criticism of government. I've told Joe for years he was voting in the wrong party. He never pays any attention. He comes here complaining today. My God. I've no government criticism and I have no criticism of business. Good Lord, they're on their backs. But I certainly think we've got, if there's a partnership, it has to be their respect for the nonprofits and getting out there and standing at the helm in the storm. Blews: You strike upon an issue that Dr. Payton points out in his paper that the voluntary tradition in this nation is, in fact, a tradition and, therefore, it must be passed on. That it is not... Cunningham: -...You bet!... Blews: ...simply enough to assume that it will exist, that it involves, as he says, the challenge to preserve and to practice and to understand, to study, to be faithful, to guard, and most importantly, to teach. And let's throw that issue open there. Are we teaching new generations that 50 �tradition, that value of volunteerism and nonprofit service? Mrs. Upjohn. Upjohn: May I speak to that a little bit? Blews: Please. Upjohn: You know, I...as I told you initially, I come from the volunteer community from station wagon driving, brownie baking, car pooling, bandage rolling, well baby clinic, you name it. And my kids were with me while I was doing that. They knew that I spent the time that while I wasn't with them and while they were safely in school, working in the community. Today, in so many families where its necessary for both parents to work, they may do volunteer service. They may have all kinds of board commitments and they may be involved, but their children don't know it. Their children have no idea _that they really are making a contribution or that, as they grow up, they need to give back. I think we have to have more youth United Ways. We have to have more involvement for children and young people that go beyond selling Girl Scout cookies but where children really understand what it means to have the joy of giving. I couldn't support Dr. Payton's paper more. I think that's a tremendously important aspect. Blews: We're really into the third stage of our discussion now. And this panel did not need to be lead there. We're talking about what do we do now for the future? Where do we go from here? How do we build on if its worthy of being built on, this tradition of the nonprofit sector, how do we create a partnership that may or may not be a very good partnership at this point or a very effective or as lively a partnership as it should be? How do we go from here to address these issues? What...What principles, what policies, what thoughts should guide us as we do that. And Dr. Sederburg, I can tell you're anxious to j ump in. Sederburg; I am because I just came from a state of the school speech last night at our local school and the pitch of the superintendent was the white paper and the ending value was a value on family and of community involvement. And I just throw out as a beginning point of all this, I think that we need to get a further discussion of values, both in the school system and in government and in business as well. I think we, perhaps, have gone through a period of time when values haven't been talked about very clearly and have been sort of shied away from. And I think that's a strength of the nonprofit sector and is going to be critical from the schools to everything to have a clarity of values. So and on our local school districts, they set it up so the kids have to put in community service time in middle school and in high school, 51 �and I think that's a neat, neat thing to do. And it goes back to the value system. Slews: Cantrell: Mr. Cantrell. Just like what Betty had said here about taking the kids around and letting them see first hand the value and teach that value. One of the big concerns right now in volunteerism is, who is passing on those particular values to the kids now that the parents are not there to do them? Are day care centers, in fact, passing those on? Are the school systems, in fact, passing it on? One of the big problems I see today, one of the hopes I see for the future, is the fact that the schools are getting on board and they are starting to make community service a part of the school experience, but not the educational experience. And that's...that's the problem that is out there right now. I know, in our community, kids are jgoing out and they're doing things and they're not able to come back and process what has happened. In their little mind, they're out there doing something and they are things happening that they don't quite understand and if you don't process that, it doesn't become a value. Experience in itself is not a value. The value has to be passed on. I call upon the school system to start to teach that value, but also to take part in that educational process, that as an individual, and adult individual or a child in this community, not only do you take from it, you give back to it. And what is the value of giving that back to? The whole idea of social insurance that started volunteerism in this country, the whole bond raising type of mentality is saying that, "There but by the grace of God go I." And, "I'm one paycheck away from being homeless." And the social insurance approach to that is to say, "I will go out and help those people because one day, when its my turn to receive help, someone will be there for me." And until we start to instill that value... Right now we're turning kids off. Okay? These kids are going out and getting these experiences and not being processed. And not only that but the agencies, sometimes, are having them do things that a 12-year-old can't do much let's have them vacuum. I'm sorry but there's not a lot of value that can be gotten out of that unless you explain to that kid what the overall agency purpose is and how vacuuming may be helping them meet that goal in some way. But that experience has to be related to the kids, and right now we're having them to do -community service and they're not learning from it and a lot of them are being turned off and I don't want it to be like the first speech I ever did when I got into this field was to a bunch of vets, and I said to them, "Volunteerism." Uhhhhhhhhh. Every time I said "Volunteerism". Urrrrrrrr. And after it was over, I went up to the guy and I said, "God, you know, what did I do wrong?" He said, "These are all World War II vets. They learned the concept of volunteerism as, "I 52 �need 3 volunteers — you, you and you — and they didn't come back." Okay? So I learned right away that in certain circles you use other words than volunteerism. Are we doing the same thing with our kids now? Is the question. Are we saying to them when they hear the word volunteerism out of adults because of their experience in 9th grade or Kindergarten, are they going to say, "Oh, no. Mr. Cantrell, don't come here with that." And that's what we need to take a look at. We need to process it. We need to start to institutionalize it. We need to pass on that value that now both working parents cannot pass on. And we need to start it in Kindergarten and take it all the way through the educational experience. Blews: Our audience... Cantrell: Please... Blews: _. ..is anxious to jump in with us. Bolhouse: Yes, please. Thank you. Susan Bolhouse. I'm on the Board of Education of Waverly Community Schools and also the Board of Directors of the Michigan Association of School Boards which is represented in your governing body. Urn, I was a little bit sorry to see that education, K-12, was not represented on this panel. And I was very pleased that Miss Gallagher repeatedly mentioned children and education. This point, up until 5 minutes ago I was getting quite frustrated because this element of children and education seemed to have been overlooked. I believe that all of your agencies, all of your organizations do represent children, that you do have them, you do work with them. Their good is at hand and in your hearts. But you send them to us, the schools, school boards and associations, to take care of. Jim Epolito is inherent in at the moment. But he said priorities. In continuing this discussion, I would like you to remember that children need to be a priority, that when it comes to setting money aside, robbing Peter to pay Paul, when you do take money away from one agency, somehow please try to keep in mind that the children, you've heard it before but it has never been truer than today with budget cuts, children are our future. And, yes, schools do need to teach volunteerism at home as part of the curriculum whether its a graduation requirement or not. As a School Board member, I feel that I pretty much cover all 3 sectors as Dr. Payton pointed out. But as a -fourth sector, yes, indeed, its family, but as a fourth sector, you can also take people such as myself who do work through an elective process — I'm elected, I'm government. Business, in essence, running a school district is business. And then, as a volunteer, because $20 a month for 30 hours a week of work doesn't really cut it. I mean, baby sitters, no thank you. But please I'm here to urge you, in finalizing this discussion, please do not take your eyes off the 53 �children. If you can't continue in building your Nonprofit Forum to include children in getting involvement and interest in business partnerships, please do. And as a representative of the Michigan Association of School Boards, I know that we have many, many school board members out there that we represent who would love to walk hand in hand with you on the local level and on the state level to bring these children, to educate them, to give them the jobs that they need and that you want to give them. Let us help you. Thank you. Blews Thank you. And be assured the Summit here is a representation of various leadership and, of course, one deals with the reality of scheduling, be assured that the Forum in its representation does have very, very thorough representation of the K-12 educational community, the community college level of education and the higher education level, both public and private. And your point is certainly well taken and we would want to offer the assurance that the children are not being forgotten and are recognized as one of the priorities when we deal with the nonprofit sector. Dr. Mawby? Mawby: I think, as we think of the future, Father Bill spoke eloquently to the potential of the seniors in society giving back. I think that's something we need to recognize and capitalize on and some exciting things are happening of that sort. The other end of the age spectrum is what we're talking about here and I think that's equally important. Part of its putting it into the academic world, for example, usually talks about 2 sectors. They talk about the for-profit business sector and they talk about the public, tax supported sector, and the rest is invisible. So to consciously put in to the sequence from pre-K-12 all the way through in Social Studies, in History, in Economics, and all aspects of life, this sector would be useful. But I think one of the most exciting opportunities, you know one of the realities of the contemporary society is that we have prolonged adolescence for most young people into their mid-20's. They have far more capacity and more motivation to be contributing, we as I guess do-gooders, say well, they're the beneficiaries of so many things. We give them so few opportunities to assume responsibility and to exercise responsibility. And one of the great ways. . . I 'm not sure I'd like compulsory volunteerism.. . •3979 Mawby; ...That's an oxymoron... . . .really, but required for graduation, I'm not sure about that one. But I am sure that young people, and it goes before the teenage years, are anxious to contribute, not always to be the beneficiaries; and that requires real creativity. One of the greatest challenges is to the school system itself, because usually they don't let the students participate and contribute. They're the recipients and the beneficiaries. So 54 �it requires creativity and the life in the community. Schools are an important part of that. But more hours are spent out of school than in school in the life of every kid, so that requires churches and all of the nonprofits, the community at large, to be more creative in involving young people. Blews; And we haven't said a great deal about the churches today. Sister Monica, would you like to help us with that very important part of the nonprofit sector? Kostielney: Well, I think there are a few things that have been mentioned that are fairly profound if we recognize the whole order of what is going on in society. I think the dramatic economic changes that are occurring, I think the shift in paradigms for how we reach consensus and I think the lack of a moral consensus in society is. . .those are all factors that bare upon the relationship and, indeed, the 3 entities. I' think from the -church's perspective, what I believe is lacking in society that I think churches can really provide a locus for and that is reflection before action. I think there are so many changes that are occurring that we need to understand and think through and question and push us a little bit on the edge. And what's needed for that is a profound reflection on the realities that are baring on our lives and I think that leads us, then, to question in new ways what is happening in these 3 sectors. I think what drives.. .what drives each of the...each of the sectors, for example, in government and the other sectors are kind of dominated by their own resources — by what can we do? I mean, government asked the question, "What can we do with our. . .with these resources?" I think business asks the same thing in terms of, "How do we move forward?" I mean, they're driven by technology, they're driven by scientific advancement, they're driven by their own mission. I think the question that the nonprofit and the churches can ask is, and they're the only ones that have the freedom to ask that is, "What ought we be doing?" Because virtually we've come to a point in society, we can do anything we want. I mean, my goodness, we can put a microbe on a gene of a sheep to produce milk for $7,000 a gallon or I mean its an absolutely, preposterous, what we can do in business and industry. But what ought we be doing? That's the question that's before the nonprofits. And what ought we be doing has to be answered only in a reflective mode. Because I think what that will do is take us out of this reductionist approach t.hat we have and we're all mired in, is that the only way you could have more is if I can have less. Now that. . .that... that doesn't always make sense. There are some values that if I give you a little more, I have a little more, too. I mean it is only in very certain, specific areas, and I think people in the arts, for example, really realize that; but I think that we're so limited and sometimes constrained by the parameters of only to give an answer, you know, be swift, sure 55 �and wrong, and not even have asked the right question, because we are constrained by, we have this much money, what are we going to do with it? Its not the right question. And that's where I think the nonprofit sector is really in response to a whole different world view. What ought we be doing, and why ought we be doing it? And if we turn to those areas of the fourth sector, the family, I think if we look at the environment where business has made significant profits from us, I mean, and who owns it and how do we share that, we come to some different understandings and we come to different models for collaboration. So I would hope that the church would continue to be the space, the place, for reflection that would help frame and fashion the debate and help move us to new answers and new awareness. Blews: We really are at the point of starting now to move toward the Board conclusion and I know that there are at least a couple _of people who have very compelling remarks that they're anxious to get onto the record. I think there was somebody from the audience who'd like to comment. Rosenbaum; Yes. My name is Ren£ Rosenbaum. I'm a Research Associate with the Julian Samora Research Institute at Michigan State University. And I have a question that I hope will touch on the relationship between cooperation between government, business and the nonprofit sector, and also I think will touch on the issue of public policy. The question is this: I've seen the role of nonprofit organizations as promoters of volunteerism and democracy. In direct contradiction, we've seen the role of nonprofit organizations, for the most part, as helping maintain national...a national safety net. It seems to me that seeing nonprofit organizations as promoters of volunteerism and coopera...and democracy implies less government and less business assistance and funding, while seeing nonprofit organizations as maintaining a national safety net requires more government and more business funding. If people from the panel could respond to that please. Blews: Quite a question. Cantre11: I don't know if this is the response. Former Governor George Romney has said in many instances that he has every confidence in the American people because there are more people than problems, and all we have to do is empower the people to deal with the problems. I think that when you take a look at human service agencies, you are looking at both of those aspects and we can't...we can't escape those. In one sense, and we are all aware in human services of the ebb and flow of monies, okay, and what happens and you see this typical process time and time again. When there's a lot of money there, the professionals rush in. We fill ourselves and all of our offices with professionals and then the money rushes out and Mr. Cantrell? 56 �we run out and get volunteers from schools like people like yourself, as student interns, and they fill those same offices. One of the things that happens, though, is...the people, the volunteer managers, will go about filling those offices. The administrators will run out and start screaming and hollering about the money that is not there any more. I think one of the things we're going to always need that. We're going to always need government and business monies and support to maintain that safety net, but at the same time we're maintaining a second safety net and that is that whole pioneer spirit. I know when I was in...in....in...grade school I said things like, "That good old American know-how, Yankee ingenuity." I never knew what it meant, but I was American and wow, I got this somehow and it gave me confidence to go out and do things because, wow, somehow because I happened to be born here, I have something special. Okay? I don't see that specialness there any more. Okay? In terms of jthe volunteers. In terms of administrators, I see them looking only in one direction, that is towards funding, and so goes the funding, so goes our operations and our agencies. And what we need to have is we need to have a marriage of those two and both of have to be seen as equally.. .equal partners in that whole relationship. Volunteers, except for the Board of Directors who are treated quite well with dinners and everything else, but your direct service volunteers are treated like third-class citizens often times. You need both of those. So in terms of that we'll never escape that, I think that its necessary, but we're maintaining 2 things here. We're maintaining that safety net for people who need it, we're also maintaining a volunteer spirit that if we every lose it in this country, everything will tumble right along with it. And we're not putting any emphasis on that volunteer spirit at all to the standpoint that we need to. I go up to Western and I talk to professors up there and I tell them, "It is impossible for any one to graduate from your university and not serve on a board or be a volunteer. It is impossible for anyone to be an educator or a social worker or a hospital administrator and not incorporate volunteers. And yet you dpn't teach the concept to them." When go out, they know how to manage people that are paid, but they have not idea how to manage that second element, and look at the agencies. Right now, for every paid person in an agency, there are at least 50, minimally 50, unpaid people. And yet we only take a look at how to manage those...that small percentage, instead of how to vastly empower and manage that other part. And I don't know if that touches on your question, but I needed to say that. Blews: Mr. Yamanishi. Yamanishi: Nonprofit organizations began with the concept of charity. Father Cunningham subscribes to the idea of giving without any 57 �compensation or expectation of compensation of any kind, giving of oneself or giving of money and never expecting anything to come back. We've evolved in this process now to where we are today. I don't know that we want to go back to that concept as nonprofit organizations because the problems are much too large and huge. But I think we 're at a crossroads where we need to just as nonprofits need to reconsider, "What is the proper role for nonprofits?*' And when we define that, we define what kind of organizations are nonprofits as well. You know, whether a public education system is considered a nonprofit, charitable organization or not, whether they get the same kind of tax incentives, whatever, as. . .as other nonprofit human service organizations. These are the kinds of issues we're going to be tussling with at this point. And I think that's where we are now. We're going to have to reconsider our role...proper role...in society and we shouldn't be driven by desires of politicians pr by business. We need to take the initiative and start to define our role for ourselves so that we can help improve the quality of life in America. Blews: Mr. Bianco. Bianco: First of all, responding to the question from the audience, it seems to me that the safety net provided by the nonprofit sector has its limits. It seems to me that when you begin to talk about whatever the number is these days, 35 million without any health care insurance, and you begin to talk about bridges collapsing and roads falling apart, its very hard for me to really see that no matter how creative we get or how many volunteers we get, its very hard for me to see issues like that being fully, fully addressed simply within the third sector without substantial financial resources. And I'm sure there are others around the room that can think of other issues like that where the safety net issue, in my opinion, cannot, in the short term — short term in this case being defined as the next 5 to 10 years as I see the short term — be provided by the...by the...by the third sector. So the issue then becomes, is it governmental resources or is it no resources? Is the problem simply going to be tolerated as it is tolerated, as you well know, in many other countries of this world, and some who do have economic resources. And I think that would be totally contradictory to the spirit we've talked about here today that's embodied, we hope, in the American conscience, of caring a whole lot about their neighbor and not wanting to see suffering and so forth. So...so clearly we've got those kind of issues that I don't think are going to be fully handled by the third sector. Now, 27 years ago, when my wife and I got married, we came back to Michigan and we went to a church retreat the first month we were back. And it turned out that the individual giving the retreat is now sitting down the table there. And our lives 58 �were never the same after we got through with Father Bill Cunningham's weekend retreat. And he's still on my case as you can see. But I'm not going to let him go. I think one of the challenges that the nonprofit also has is a credibility challenge, and its not just what Father Bill says about all of us working for free which may work for him — God takes care of him, you know — Kroger sort of takes care of us and God helps out sometimes. But I think one of the challenges that all of us have is the credibility of our third sector or nonprofit organizations. I' 11 never forget when I was considering leaving Dayton/Hudson Corporation and I talked to several people and I said, "Gee, should I really do this? Does this make sense to you?" Several people, basically business and professional people, said, "Oh, God, Joe. Don't go out to that Detroit Institute of Arts. Don't go to work in a nonprofit organization. You're going to lose all your management skills. You're going to get caught in the most _God-awful politics and nonproductive activity that you've ever seen in your life. Just stay away. Don't do it." I would assert that if you talked to most business executives, and although Peter Drucker's certainly helping us all out a great deal these days in his nice artic les, but I suspect if you talked to most business executives, they would assume that people who work in nonprofit organizations may have great spiritual qualities, may have great caring qualities, but I suspect at least their mind set would be that most of us are not very good managers. So I think the credibility issue for us is how do we forcefully demonstrate financial integrity, management strength, as third sector people, to get the respect of people like Representative Bandstra and Representative Kosteva and other people who, even in the governmental sector, will have that question and that accountability. So I think we've got a lot of work to do there to demonstrate our management competence and our financial capabilities and I don't mean fund raising, I mean accountability. Never losing sight, of course, of what Father Cunningham and Sister Monica and others have said, that we, in the process of doing that have a balance in our organizations so we never lose sight of the caring mission and the soaring to the stars, as Father Bill said. But as we soar to the stars, we should have our audit in our pocket and we should have a good, tight organization. Blews: With that, Dr. Payton, you helped to start this whole discussion. Can you help us to come to a conclusion? Payton: Well, I'm a. . .any of you ever heard of Meyer's break personality type indicators, I'm an ENPP and I don't like to come to closure on these things. I don't believe in closure on open-ended, problematic questions of the kind we're talking about. In fact, I think its a real mistake to think that there's an answer to the question. . .questions we've been 59 �trying to talk over. I said in the paper, and listening to all of you this morning, I'm persuaded that to restate what I said in the paper, mission is the key. But my understanding of that has been expanded and, I think, enlightened by some of the things that I've heard here. As you recall, my opening remarks I mentioned what somebody called the "U.S.S.Were" — Russia — the society facing problems that, I think, make our's appear to be...make our concerns appear to be self-indulgent. Very, very grave problems. Bill Sederburg captured, in a sense, what...what I think they face and that I think we face when we start with the notion of mission and we think about mission in the larger sense. When he used the phrase, rewriting the social contract, that kind of language is being used more widely all the time these days. _I tried to think about, as I heard that, the efforts to rewrite the social contract. It has taken place in my lifetime. Two of them are symbolized in the most familiar way by political figures, the first being Franklin Roosevelt and the second being Ronald Reagan. Alternative views, if you will, of the social contract. But there have been other periods, and one that particularly relates to what we're talking about here is the nonprofit sector. A hundred years ago, give or take a few decades, modern American philanthropy emerged in its present, general, third sector shape. There were things like charity organization societies founded, beginning to be founded, shortly after the Civil War. That same period where we first saw the emergency of great philanthropists of the kind of George Peabody and later Carnegie and Rockefeller. It was at the period when Jane Adams founded Hull House, which is the best known symbol of the whole neighborhood settlement movement. It was the same period when the genius created the first model of...models of the United Way, one a Jewish federation in Boston and another the effort which failed at the time in Denver. A period when Rockefeller and Carnegie, faced with the really terrible frustration of trying to use their wealth responsibly, found that they didn't have the instruments to do that. And Mr. Rockefeller set some of his associates to work at the task that lead to the creation of the model, an American invention, the model of the philanthropic, general purpose philanthropic grand-making foundation of which the Kellogg Foundation is one of the largest and best known. By the way, I have to... I have to do this for John D. Rockefeller, who is known as such an austere person. His advisors came back and they told him about creating this foundation that would exist in perpetuity and Mr. Rockefeller is supposed to have said, "Perpetuity is a very long time." 60 �If we look at the period, say from 1870 to 1930 the latter period showing the emergence of the community foundation and a variety of other things, we look at a period when people like us were extraordinarily innovative, creative, risktaking, bold, imaginative, all those good wonderful things that we admire when we see it. And the challenge to us, it seems to me, if we are talking about rewriting the social contract, rethinking this, and if mission is the key, it means we really should think through what this fundamental mission is. And we can't just think about the third sector. We have to do it in the context of all 3. If we're an American democracy anything remotely like the one that we've all known and loved, then we will continue to be a 3 sector society. So we've got to call business to task in examining its place in this 3 sector society as well as government, as well as the sector that we've been trying to focus on here today. We have an opportunity, I think, in this process/ to be as creative and important and honorable to our mission, passing on this tradition that we've inherited — an opportunity of exceptional importance. The next 20 years, I am told, will see the largest transfer of wealth from one generation to another, not only in the history of this country but probably in the history of the world. Estimated numbers don't sound authentic in the mouth of a humanist like myself, estimates ranging from $3 to $7 trillion dollars. So although we've got lots of economic problems, don't you believe that we are not a wealthy society, that there isn't money to do things. That's not our problem. But it is a very serious question of what those resources will be used for and I think that's part of what will come out of our participation in this rewriting of the social contract. Blews: In that spirit, not of closure but and not of an ending but of really of a beginning, I'd like to suggest that the panel take a vote here, and since there are several Legislators here, this seems an appropriate thing to do, how many of you would be in favor of continuing this kind of summit and this kind of dialogue into the future? All in favor say "Aye.M All: "Aye " Blews: Opposed? I think that speaks rather emphatically to our commitment today to really a new beginning and a new partnership. We do, on behalf of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum, want to express a very, very special thank you to each of the panelists, each of you leaders from business, from government, from the nonprofit sector, for the very, very thoughtful contributions that you have made to the dialogue here. We talked about partnerships, and it simply should be 61 �noted here that a commitment to partnership is reflected in the presence by each of these individuals here today. They could have been many other places. There were many other demands on their calendars. They made a personal commitment. In a sense, they and their organizations made a fiscal commitment by committing the resource, the value of their time, to be here with us. And so we do want to thank each of you for your commitment to this beginning partnership. We hope that those of you who have listened in and looked in have found this to be a stimulating discussion, have found it to be a thoughtful discussion, and we hope that in your organizations and in your activities around this state and throughout our society, that this will also lead you to new challenges and to new opportunities for partnership. Thank you. Lewis: Maryellen? _Now I have the camera. So I'd like to also thank all of you. I think that it was an extraordinary conversation hearing from the Michigan Nonprofit Forum, you have certainly laid down and agenda for us. I'd like to invite you all who are able to stay to join us for lunch in the adjoining room. Also, in your packets, there is a pink sheet. We would really appreciate your comments, because this is the beginning of a continuing conversation. So if you could add your thoughts, your suggestions to these sheets and simply leave them on your chair, or if you'd like to send them in at another time. Thank you. (End of Summit — 62 12:34 p.m.) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Minutes-DC Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit minutes Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit minutes. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49721 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/18bee601d02987439c5f5c072338d2a5.pdf 1fcd503b8955743723937ba30ab5895b PDF Text Text MICillGAN NONPROFIT FORUM MNF SUMMIT February 28, 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community ' �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM SUMMIT February 28, 1992 Lewis: · ~ I hate to say that we're already running a little lat its not a great way to start but its just an exciting ning. I want to welcome you to this first Summit of e Michigan Nonprofit Forum. I'm Maryellen Lewis. I 'rn e Executive Director of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum whic is sponsoring this event. You' 11 be hearing much more abo it when it's on the tape. Right now, we're not so I can e a little more relaxed. We have a very, very distinguished here this morning. representing leadership from ree parts of our communities -- government, business an the non-profit sector. We also have a very, very distingui ed audience, so I know ~hat its going to be very lively. ou will be hearing more about that when our moderator be ins. I want you to be encouraged to speak up, to make ur comments, particularly the audience at the invited sec ions, to be sure that you don't feel intimidated by thes cameras around here or the fact that there are television ights focused down on you. You will be getting an overvi of this morning's program from our moderator, but I wanted o take a few minutea to give you a little orientation, just s a set-up, because I know it may be unfamiliar to some of ou. In case you ha~'t noticed, you're being filmed and aped, but I don't want you to be nervous about that. Th e have been a lot of arrangements made to make this as ac ommodating as possible. The tables are triple lathed so that there won't be a noise problem. You have need to worry about the mikes. · You don't have to touch em. In fact, it would be much better if you didn't. Andy don't need to lean in to them. · Just speak normally. T ey're set up to accommodate to you. It would be best if y did pay a little attention to your papers apd not have th papers brush up against the microphones. That can cause me problems. Also, please ~ep in mind that the discussion is not just among the p le who are here today, although that's your immediate au ·ence. But because this is being taped, we will be editing pe tape and it will be used through our network statewide r educating and informing the public around the state abo these very issues. They will be used at ... the edited t e will be used as a stimulus for round table discussi in various parts of the state. I should also point ou that word "editing" means that you don't have to worry t much if you make some kind of a snafu and you want it cut .ut, . it will go right on the cutting room floor. / tI 1 �~ The cameras ... The microphones are automa That is, when you begin to speak, the microphones autom ically pick you up. That means that if you're talking to y r ne· hbors, it will pick you up. So please pay a little b. of tention to that. However, the cameras are not automati and cause of that, we will need to pay a little bit of att tion o accommodating to our camera crews. So our moderat r wil recognize you. If you wouldn't mind paying some a tenti to this moment of having him recognize you so that the c era can then turn to you. Now that may get a little more fficult if things get a little hot, but, for the mos part, we'll try to do that. And with this audience that we have re, I'd like to make two points for you so that you'r ' full~ aware of this. This mike is not live now, I believe but ill be when we have the points where the audience w·11 be invited to speak. When you speak, would you please wai to b recognized by the moderator _so that, again, the camera can ocus on you. You might want to, during the discussion, take orne notes (There is notepaper in your folders.) so tha yo can direct your comments to specific people or point tha were raised. And remember it will be edited so your mm ts can then be put adjacent to those comments in the f nal tape. Also, when you do speak, please say your name, yo r ganization and your title so that those who are not here in this room and who won't know you will have some underst nd · g of where you are coming from. And now I think that w ' ready to begin. I see the cameras are all focused and e dy. Our moderator this morning is someone that most of .Y already know very well. He is the President of the Ass ciation of Independent Colleges and Universities of Mic I . gan, and he is also the Chair of the Public Policy Commi~ e of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. I'm very pleased to int oduce to you Dr. Edward Blews. Blews: Thank you, Maryel n. These are my pre-camera remarks. I'm your Phil Donohue or the day. I will be much kinder, though, than he general! / is to his audiences. I would like to offer &.. word of co endation to Maryellen Lewis and our MNF Executive Dire or and her staff for all of the work that they have put into his wonderful project. And I'd like to thank ea:h ?f you l a~ers who graciously consented to participate. Th1s :s an e it1ng but maiden voyage and trial r~n of a grand experLment, o please bear with us and be adaptable ~s we go. Before th 'Cameras roll, I would like to share just a few nd ground rules about the logistic~. First about . .t. From now until about 9:40 we'll h~~e the 1.ntroduc 1.on of the Summit, Dr. Robert Payton's comments ~e' 11 s t . the stage for dialogue, and then we '11 have th~ 1.ntrod t1on ?f the panelists, and it's my job to try to keep us on rack w1th that process. Then from about 9:40 to noon, 2 �with a mid-morning break I assure you, we will go through three stages of dialogue. Stage 1 in lves dentification, definition and values of the nonprofi sect Stage 2 will speak to the relationship between g vernm t, business, the nonprofit sector and the changi g d issues and tensions that are at play in tho re ionships. Stage 3 will involve insights for the fu ure the relationship or the question, "Where do we go fr m he e?" That gives all of you, then a sense of where we h pe be going today. A few other preparatory commen f the panelists in addition to what Maryellen has shared, ; an as panelists you'll want to be prepared for a couple of s e that will come very quickly after Dr. Payton's remarks. F rst, we ask you to please be prepared to briefly introduc ourselves around the. table. So rather than having the mode a or drone on as you sit there and stiffly smile and the came pans the room, each of you will tell the audience, both t video tape audience and the real - people in the audience h , who you are. We ask you to be very brief in that and s e this information about yourself: your name, your title, name of your organization, and one sentence about what y represent or the constituency or interest that you repr ent. If you wish, you're welcome to write out a note about that before that point in the program. A fore-warning. gin Stage 1, we will play a little word association game. m not going to tell you what the word is yet or you won't b very spontaneous about it. But we ask you ... There will b two of these, and we ask you to write that word on what shou be a fairly stiff piece of card-type paper in front of you. · And you'll want to locate that and be sure that you have th The one word you' 11 write on the one side and then write t:he other on the other, and you've got a marking pen at ur table so you can write it nice and legibly and boldly an argely so that as we go around and do this word associa , we'll ask you to hold up the card and be sure to poin toward a camera so that as you say the word, the camera c ' n also visually pick up the association that you have made. t/. Thirdly, 1 ur discussion we want to focus on principles, dynamics ~ relationships. Please feel free to cite cases or issues i llustration of principles or relationships; but let's av i debating interminably specific issues or specific .politic issues. We want to focus on principles and on relatio ihips here. Though J hours seems like a lot of time, with the caliber of the h ~ts and minds on this panel, I assure you that it will fly it already is flying. We have a full agenda, so plea be frank and forceful in your comments, but also try to be ccinct. On the other hand, I will need plenty of help in 3 �I J trying to moderate this panel, particularl n avoiding dead space on the air. So please be read~ jump in -- freely jump in. But I do ask you to give s~ sort of a signal when you're ready to speak out so that . an attempt to recognize you and that also gives us the/'~ se that brings the camera around to you. If you use ac;o s, please help to interpret them. Realize that we're ta ng to an audience that does not necessarily know what IC which happens to be the acronym for our association. I bt that any of you knew what that acronym meant until I mentioned it. to the audience. As Maryellen has And then an inv it mentioned, there 11 be 2 points in the program where you will be invited come to the microphone here and join in the discussion. T first will occur at the end of Stage 1 of the discussion wh we talk about identification of the nonprofit sector, and en the second will come at the end of Stage 3 as we try to ing a sense of closure and a sense of conclusion -to the d berations of the day. I trus that I have anticipated any questions that you may have d, having said that then, we will not proceed with all due arning to the cameras to the formal part of the program he today. Hello. It is my privilege to welcome you to this special and first summit sponsored by the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. On behalf of the forum's Chair, Dr. Russell Mawby, our Executive Director, Maryellen Lewis, and the Board of Directors of the Forum, many of whom are gathered in this room, we invite yQu to brace yourself for a lively and energetic dialogue about some issues and relationships very important in our society today. My name is Edward Blews, and in my professional life, I serve as the President of the of the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan. But I stand before you today, as a member of the Board of Directors of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Established in 1988, the Michigan Nonprofit Forum is a dynamic new coalition of statewide organizations and leaders representing the wonderful diversity of nonprofit entities. The Michigan Nonprofit Forum describes itself as, and I quote, " ... a statewide alliance to promote the awareness and effectiveness of Michigan's nonprofit sector and to advance the cause of volunteerism and philanthropy in the state." In its relatively short life but rapid maturation, the Forum has evolved into an enterprise charged with achieving a new awareness and increased capacity of Michigan's nonprofit sector, and with interfacing funders, nonprofits and the public to help promote volunteerism and philanthropy in this state of our's. / �I / '!'he Board of Directors of the Forum has adopted 6 guiding principles designed to reflect the mission of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. One of those principles states, "The service -of the nonprofit sector to the public depends on an interactive partnership between service providers or nonprofit entities, funders, policy makers and the public. The Michigan nonprofit community should promote constructive dialogue among all these parties." You will probably hear the word "mission" used rather frequently, or so we hope, during the discussions of the day. This Summit which brings us together really goes to the very heart of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum's mission. Those of you who talk and those of you who listen and look in on today's proceedings are really participating in a rather historic event. This is a unique undertaking, an exciting experiment. It is the first in a series of forums bringing together our society's leaders to think on compelling issues aff~cting our society and the nonprofit sector. The purpose, though, is not to provide the answers but rather to pose and clarify and stimulate the est· rom th~m to sga~ - ~q 9n- o dialogue this par ou all - It s Now very shortly we will be introducing our very distinguished panel of government, business and nonprofit leaders. But first, to set the stage for our dialogue, we will hear some .remarks by a very distinguished national leader and recognized expert on philanthropy. Before I introduce him, let me simply mention for the information of the audience that he has prepared and circulated to the panelists today a paper discussing the theme of this particular summit and he will ( share some comments about that theme in just a moment. His name is Dr. Robert L. Payton. He comes to us as the Director of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. From 5 �I 1977 to 1987, he served as the President of the EXXON Education Foundation. His very impressive leadership career has included 2 college presidencies and a United States Ambassadorship. The recipient of honors to numerous to cite, he is an author on philanthropy who puts his words into action as leader and volunteer for countless good causes. Please J01n me in welcoming Dr. Payton to address us on the topic at hand. Dr. Payton. Payton: Good morning. I am very pleased to be here with you. I was pleased to be invited to prepare the paper that has been circulated to you. It occurred to me when someone commented before the meeting that they had read the paper that I hope it is provocative enough to serve its purpose, but not so provocative that it puts its author in jeopardy. I hope to stimulate conversation that comes from you because you ~ £.Q_~!ty_ t:._hc?~ is the matter of fQPC~~n _QI! tht§ _ / Over the last several years, along with everyone else, I have been profoundly impressed by the events in Central and Eastern Europe. I'm old enough to be able to say that my generation as a generation never believed that it was possible that such events would take place without vast bloodshed and destruction. So it is that this most extraordinary event provide us with, I think, an extraordinarily important opportunity. Given the conditions that would cause this meeting to be of compelling interest to the people in Michigan, what would an analogous meeting bE like in Russia today? Who would come and w_hat values and understandings would they bring? We're advised they're invited to provide advice increasingly to countries in that part of the world that will help them develop a third sector. What we are watching is a situation where societies are moving from a condition of being one sector societies, with strong encouragement from the West to -become two sector societies in the beginnings of suggestions that they should become three s e ctor societies. It is my strong conviction that unless they become three sector societies, they will not become democracies. It is my very strong conviction that understanding that the United States is a three sector society is essential to understanding it as a democratic society. 6 �This is not a subject at the margin of our interests. This is a subject at the center of our lives, whichever sector we are parts of, because as citizens we have had the great good fortune to become members -- to be members of a three sector society. The first sector can be thought of -- the government that is -- as having an essential defining term, and the term that I have to use that says that without it you can't talk about government is the word "power"; the legitimate use of force in behalf of the community. If you take the notion of that away from your notion of government, it seems to me your notion of government collapses. There is a defining term of the second sector that will be something like the word "wealth" or the word "property"; the right to acquire and use and to dispose of wealth and property according to your own individual private interests. If you were to take that out of the marketplace, the second sector, ~t would collapse. So my habit as a professor is to say to my students, "Then, of course, you're ready to tell me what the defining term is for the third sector. " And, along with most professors, there has been a heavy, ominous silence. I will break the silence and tell you that my notion is that the word has to have something to do with morality, and I mean morality only in the sense that intervening in the lives of other people for their benefit with no public mandate is a moral action. And if you took that out of the third sector, you wouldn't have a third sector. Final for a · stance responsi ·lity. asking fo n9 formal what we usua might come t articulated request for of self-he has no fo reasonab doing to ally, the central er, complex system ay, usually with a cu cardboard box with the 7 the place of self-help in alking about. . . I do this, A cube is, in my case, a ords around the side. Its �the kind of thing that Rubik w ld have designed as a cube if he'd nly had tenth grade geo try like I did. But the first face o it, in other words, s ys "self-help." The second face says utual aid. What e you and your family and your friend and your neighbo s and your associates and your collea es and those othe people who do have some f al or informa claim on you, wh re you doing in that waY, working togethe with others, to de with the problem? II The thir Its a rec as indivi mutual be or so diff we will no us to part most famil certain ki If each on mutual aid, satis factor question. people for 11 ord "goverrunent a sistance." any things that e cannot do s accordin to our self-in erest or our re some t ·ngs that ar so important omplicated t at we have o a~sume that ose things, b we will require all of some way, that to sa , the simplest, e will decide t tax a e another to do se 3 questions is red -- self-help, ent assistance ome plausible way, or you, you then fa the philanthropic u prepared to offer as ist nee to help those you have no personal, responsibility? Now a cube h s bottom and I'm not trying t uggest superiority a d inferio "ty here. But since we're lking about philant opy, the t p of the box says that t e is a dimension t at cuts thro gh all these things all t time and that's th word ~~altruis concern about othe If that were t a factor in the human condition, uldn't be here. We wouldn't be ta king about this subje t. t's always pre ent to some extent The most :igid, ri~ ro s libertarian is !truistic to some e ent, like ~t or no then all the est of us who are, viously, high-min d a d altruistic are also egoistic, self-i terested -- to s e ex e t. And altruism and egoism are not only on the top and t e bottom of the box, they are on each side of t!lis d · cussio . That the people who come to you have a selfinter t just s you have an altruistic one. But you should reme er they h~ve altruistic concerns and that you have selfinter sted ones\. II -- ink some of these brief notes are intended to suggest that this first sector of government, these notions of self-help and mutual aid in the marketplace and elsewhere, and philanthropy -- self-interest -- concern about others -interact in our lives in absolutely extraordinary and wonderful ways that makes our society, in my judgement, the most privileged that I know of. And I hope that sense is not something that one is that proud about in the sense that its a claim of virtue on one's part because we are not here 8 �because of our own initiatives but because of others who have gone before us have made it possible and desirable for us to be here. That principle of the philanthropic tradition that we are part of is what, I think, really distinguishes American democracy. It is the best thing, I think, that we have that we can share with the rest of the world. It is the best tradition, I think, to help us face the kinds of difficulties you're talking about in your community and we're talking about in mine today. Each one of us is not just part of a sector. Each one of us is a part of that tradition, And so I wish you well in your discussions and will close at that point -- short of my normal 50 minute lecture. Thank you. Slews: Thank you, Dr. Payton. I'm certain you were very popular with your students with that kind of lecture. To carry on the dialogue from here, we have gathered around this table a panel of leaders from government, from the business ~orld and from the nonprofit world. And at this point I'm going to toss out a little teaser because it may that there is a fourth sector. These 3 sectors that I have mentioned, and sector is a term that we will hear frequently today, are certainly a significant, significant part of the infrastructure of our society. The government or the public sector, the business world or the for-profit sector, and the nonprofit sector or what is sometimes called the charitable world. And I will mention the teaser, that there may be a fourth sector that somebody may strike upon as we continue our dialogue here. There are 2 things in particular that strike me about this particular panel. The first is that they are a very, very distinguished group of government, business and nonprofit leaders. The second thing that strikes me about this panel is its diversity. Now I am also acutely aware that a panel of leaders like this cannot be kept down and cannot be kept silent for very long. And so we are going to now ask each member of the panel to briefly introduce himself or herself and the perspective from which they speak to us today, beginning with Mr. Yamanishi on my left. Yamanishi: Thank you. My name is Herb Yamanishi. I'm the Executive Director of the Michigan Community Action Agency Association. Community Action Agencies are part of the old War on Poverty Program. We cover all 83 counties of the State of Michigan and are one of the largest social service/human se:;vice delivery systems in the State of Michigan serving pver a million and a half people. - ~d cni'isi a•A 7 l' enanr;t? j7Blv+nt=the 9 �..... Sederburg: Mawby: I'm Bill Sederburg, Vice President of Public Sector Consultants here in Lansing, Michigan. Public Sector Consultants is an independent, for-profit research firm specializing_ in ~tate P'!!Uic .policy _ ,Qnd .public ...opin~ · 1 !~91.1;h . _J Afi" YQli ~e~eed rWhaF sec t:er Wet; ~Bp:1!888ft'8 I l~i:tia tiae .l_:!!:!!.of R"£1 !? ~·••• ifisw!W:tants 1 _!•re'"2L[£r:£FQ!L.li: \ I'm no sure exactlry what sector I'm supposed to be representing, so I think I'll represent the for-profit sector today and shed my 12 years previous experience of Qeing in the State Legislature. I'll let the other folks on the panel that are currently in the Legislature try to defend that in~titution • . I'm Russ Mawby, Chairman W. K. Kellogg Foundation -grant-making foundation. as the Chairman of the Nonprofit Forum. and Chief Executive Officer of the which is an independent, private I also have the privilege of serving Board of Trustees of the Michigan Up john: I 'rn Elizabeth Up john. I'm Vice Chair of the Kalamazoo Foundation. I am 1992 Campaign Chairman of the Greater Kalamazoo United Way Campaign, so you can see I'm a bit of a masochist. I am new kid on the block as far as the Michigan Nonprofit Forum is concerned, and delighted to be here. I've been a volunteer in Kalamazoo County for more than 42 years. Kostielney: I'm Sister Monica Kostielney, the Executive Director of the Michigan Catholic Conference, which is the public policy arm for the Roman Catholic Church in Michigan, which addresses the issues ranging f~c_:>m, ~g~ng __ to taxation and everyt!ling- in _ betwe~n, 'l ._ he · · p -tnershi fo ~- coal~t~on - do · yo . Cunningham: ---- · --- ~--- - -- I 1m Father William Cunningham, Director of Focus Hope which is a Metropolitan Detroit Human and Civil Rights organization, and our objective over the past 23 years has been to stimulate people and help people to become p~_y.ctive as a major part.£! their ri ht in . humS\n. di,gn.i,~y ! / -· · ~~ t Roehrig: J ~ a I I 'm Larry Roehrig. I 'm Secretary /Treasurer of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 25. I'm here on behalf of the entire membership of the Michigan AFL-CIO ·0[a£Stapds fsa elli:! MuG£ leaR -EgderartQo/l 10 �Clark: I'm Jane Deanne Clark, Senior Director for Health Policy Analysis at Michigan Healthcare Institute which is the notfor-profit research arm of Michig~n Hospital Association. Michigan Hospital Association represents all close-to-200 hospitals in the State of Michigan. They are, in the vast majority, nonprofit and in addition to that, I also am Executive Director of a unique organization which combines business, state government and the hospitals in the data collection effort, and that organization· is called Michigan Health Data Corporation. Kosteva: H~llo. I'm Jim Kosteva, a fourth term Legislator from southeastern Michigan. My legislative focus has focused on ~he E's -- education, environment and economic development. Bianco: I'm Joe Bianco from The Founders Society of the Detroit Institute of Arts which is the private sector support organization of the DIA. My entire background, as some of the people in this room know, has been in engineering and finance and economics, and yet I found myself running a major corporate giving program some years ago, now in the nonprofit sector asking for money and trying to assist in the management of a nonprofit. So I've had a chance to look at it from both sides. Hoffecker: I'm Fred Hoffecker. I'm an Assistant Attorney General. I work with Frank Kelly. For the past decade or so I've been fortunate enough to have as part of my duties of supervising the Charitable Trust section of the office and working with both sides of the nonprofit sectors, both the grant givers and the grant seekers, and I'm very pleased to be here today. Benavides: Hello. My name is Tony Benavides and I'm a Councilman for the City of Lansing. I'm also Executive Director for Cristo Ray C~mmunity Center, a human service agency which is a private, nonprofit organization located here in Lansing. Cantrell: Hello. I'm Aaron Cantrell. I guess I'm here in 2 capacities. I'm Executive Director of the Voluntary Accident Center in Kalamazoo and Volunteer Centers are basically there to recruit volunteers who are trained through our administered volunteer program, and to promote the whole concept of volunteerism. I'm also a Vice President of the Volunteer Centers of Michigan which is made up of all the Volunteer Centers here in Michigan and our purpose is to develop new centers and to promote volunteerism throughout the State. 11 �l ler: I'm Judy Miller. In my present life I am now Michigan Business Ombudsman ~n the Department of Commerce, a gubernatorial appointee given the responsibility of solving problems that businesses have with State government and providing some solutions in regard to that. Also, on special assignment in the areas of Arts and Child Care. Epolito: Hello. My names is James Epolito. I'm the Chief Executive Officer of Blue Care Network/Health Central, a Lansing-based 70,000 member Health Maintenance Organization. Work: Good morning. I'm Lois Work. I'm Vic~ President of New Detroit Incorporated which is the nation's first urban coalition. We began in 1967 to try and insure that the needs of the poor and the disadvantaged in Detroit and the Detroit Metropolitan Area are met. We do this basically through advocacy on a policy level and through serving as both a ~atalyst and an implementer of program projects. Wilson: Hello. I'm Mark Wilson of Michigan State University where, in addition to teaching Political Economy, I direct a nonprofit Michigan project which is a research and information dissemination initiative to inform the nonprofit community in Michigan more about its experiences and the scale of operations. Vaughn: Hello. I'm Senator Jackie Vaughn III, Associate President of the Michigan Senate. I'm a student both of the public and the private sector. Coxa Good morning. My name is E. L. Cox. I'm currently the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Accident Fund of Michigan. In my former life, I was the Chairman of the Amerisure Insurance Companies representing the business sector of this and the target of many of you for contributions over the years. Gallagher: I'm Jan Gallagher. I'm a partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm of Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg. I practice extensively in the area of exempt organization law. I edit independent sector's quarterly publication, STATE TAX TRENDS FOR NONPROFITS. And I 'm currently engaged as a consultant for independent sector in the development of their white paper on the role of nonprofit organizations. Bandstra: I'm Representative Rick Bandstra, a Legislator in the Michigan House from west Michigan. I'm in government now. In a previous life I was a lawyer in the private sector and I continue to be involved in a lot of nonprofit board activities back in Grand Rapids. 12 �Good morning. My name is Bob Ivory. I'm the President and Chief Professional Officer of the United Way of Michigan. United Way of Michigan is an association of some 110 United Ways throughout the State about $139 million in this past year ~ 10 ~ta~~~~~~~~ \ Anderson: Hi. Blews: Jhank you to each of you. Through those introductions we can certainly see the interrelationship in our own professional and personal lives between the 3 sectors that we have described. In his prepared paper, Dr. Payton described this Summit as an exercise in exploratory discourse. We enter the discussion with questions, and will explore possibilities. I'm N. Charles Anderson, President of the Continuing to quote from Dr. Payton, the Summit itself has no authority to affect change. In fact, the Summit has only the moral authority we may bring to it, individually and collectively. If we are successful, others will carry the discussion forward towards action and implementation. We will be pursuing this discussion in 3 stages. We might think of it as the booster stages on a rocket or on a space ship. Each stage of the discussion, we hope, will thrust us forward to the next level and the next stage of the dialogue. Those 3 stages, briefly stated, are first identity or identification; secondly -- the evolving partnerships; and thirdly insights and principles to guide us into the future. S!:age 1, then, really poses an identity crisis. That is, what is the identification of the nonprofit sector? What is this entity -- this thing that we call nonprofit? What is its role in a pluralistic and democratic society? What do we expect of it? What values energize it? What distinguishes it from government and from business? 13 ~ I �I Let's begin with a little game of word association. It may be revealing. Each of our panelists has a large card in front of them and a marker pen. I'm going to ask them now to write on that card the very first and honestly the very first word or adjective that com.~s into _, y..QQ;r; mind when_ we s~ t!;!e_. word ":~. ' r fit secto " . :::~e=:&~ 9t!*;r!s~~';;~!me~~ Anderson: Well the first thing I think of is Social Services·. Wilson: I used Invisible, because we look at what nonprofits do but we don't think of how they're organized. Work: And I used Conscience. I thought I needed one word. I meant Community Conscience. Bianco: We're all working together for the good of the Community. Kosteva: I thought of a different bottom line -- Fund Raising. 14 �Roehrig: Spoken as a Treasurer -- Donations. Cunningham: Spoken as a theologian -- Voluntary. Because it springs from the highest instincts and highest ideals of human · nature·. K9stielney: I wanted to put Hard Work but I put Service instead. Upjohn: Spoken from experience -- Volunteer. Yamanishi: You've got two votes for Charity. Blews: -Charity wins by a plurality. That's marvelous. An illustration, again, of the diversity of the sector. But let's play the game one more time. What word now, what value ... What value pops into your mind when we say the word nonprofit sector? What underlying value do you first think of? And the pens are busily scribbling again\. What value do we think of associated first with the nonprofit sector? And : : s time we' ~~[~~i:_h_ C~~ncilman Benavidef8c1 ie"- that 1: Benavides: Commitment. Cantrell: Caring. Miller: Love. Epolito: Credibility. work: Service. Wilson: Altruism. Vaughn: Good for All. Cox: Altruism. Gallagher: Another vote for Altruism. Bandstra: Yet another vote for Altruism. Ivory: Community Good. Anderson: Positive Results. 15 j 1 �ssion. - --·-- Kosteva: Eternal Hope. Hoffecker: Freedom -- to make choices, where to put your time or your money in your altruistic way to do good. Payton: And my word is Democracy which tries to capture these notions of Community and Caring. Slews: Mr. Epolito, you used the word Credibility. As a person from the business perspective, how do you think of the nonprofit sector? How would you define or describe, in a paragraph, what the nonprofit sector is? Epolito: Blews: Representative Bandstra. As a legislator, what do you think of? What is your definition of the nonprofit sector? Bandstra: I guess I'd like to follow up on something Jim said about that and I think that what's happening here with the credibility problem is what happens so often times in all kinds of institutions in our society, that good apples are infected with the aura that surrounds some bad apples. And I've often wondered whether we, as State Legislators or nationally, ought to come up with some better system of required disclosure of 16 --- - �·, how nonprofit organizations work to provide assurance to everyone that through some standardized reporting system, the institutions that they are supporting are reputable and worthy of their support, to deal with the kind of public perception problem that sometimes does infect the nonprofit side, unfortunat~ly and unwarrantedly often. Blews: How do you in the nonprofit sector react to that particular idea? Father Cunningham? Cunningham: To me, credibility is ... is less ... far less important than integrity. I don't think people ought to be trusted or believed. I think they ought to have track re~ords to be abl~ to demonstrate that they're worthy of the support of government and partnership with industry. · Blews: Lets refer ... return to the notion, though, of legislative involvement in terms of helping to assure accountability of -the nonprofit sector. Mr. Bianco, from the perspective of the Detroit Institute of the Arts, how does that resonate with you? Bianco: setting that framework would be a very healthy contribution, in my opinion, that the Legislature could make to the credibility of our nonprofits. Blews: You've used the term "definition" in your comments. Sister Monica, as the Executive Director of the Michigan Catholic 17 I ,; �Conference you're part of the nonprofit sector. define the nonprofit sector? Kostielney: How do you Well, I think my understanding of the nonprofit sector comee from the very nature of the human person, and that is if you begin with the premise that each person is good and has desire to do good and then moves out from that premise and coalesces with other people to good for society or for the common good, you have a legitimate group of citizenry who have a right to be as recognized as the other sectors in society. I do not see the nonprofit sector as kind of picking up what other people can't do or won't do. I see that as a bad approach to nonprofits; but rather that there is a basic good that drives one to accomplish good and that is a basis then for forming the nonprofit sector, inn the whole spectrum or range of issues or values that touch human lives, from basic human needs to the transcendent values that we all seek -- going ri ht f sic huma s to the art.s. f" And ' 0 ~ e . tim pla-c en, fo eliOnpro ec -:t - be pres nt d v · e in ~ _ .+t j es. •Erie, Blews: We've said a great deal about values with regard to the nonprofit sector. But when we ask the question of definition, we really haven't very clearly defined what the nonprofit sector is. And we're fortunate ve with us toda a national ert th ~-e~~ou5s~~ona · .· . . a-n-e~~he 9!~~~~~~~~~;;:~~~~ er, you a w Miss firm and is aagrecognized expert the definition and the protection of the nonprofit sector. And she, as you have heard, is conducting a study of the independent sector or the nonprofit sector in the process of preparing a white paper on that very subject. Miss Gallagher, structurally, what is it that makes nonprofits nonprofits? Gallagher: I think that probably the single, most important structural differentiation is the one that we've already discussed this ~orning, and that is the concept that nonprofits, as a matter of law, are barred from operating for the private benefit of anyone. That's a concept that often doesn't get, in my judgment, the attention it deserves. It certainly is the single characteristic that distinguishes nonprofit organizations most clearly from business enterprises. The -concept of no private benefit involves an attention to salary levels that are reasonable, to operating in a way that doesn't advance the private interest of any individual or any selfselected group of individuals. It also, for most of the organizations today we're calling nonprofit, involves a commitment of their assets irrevocably to a public purpose. Again, that's something that sometimes gets lost in discussions of the differences between a business and a 18 �nonprofit organization. A self-imposed characteristic, not one that 1 s actually required by law, at least not very frequently, is that the types of nonprofits, again that we're discussing this morning, typically are governed by volunteer Boards of Directors. And, again, that's an aspect of nonprofit structure that, I think, has not gotten the public attention that it deserves recently. The concept of a group of volunteers coming together in a community to form an organization in response to a community need, and then lending their time to provide policy guidance to that organization, is an important characteristic of nonprofit organizations. Finally, I think its a characteristic of nonprofit organizations that they do exist to provide some form of public good or public benefit. :, slews: In your study, · you've been looking at the broad range of entities that fall within that term nonprofit sector. Can you _give us a sense of what that range encompasses? Well, for purposes of the independent sector paper, the organizations that make up independent sectors 1 membership and the steering committee of the group that's looking at this issue have divided themselves into the following categories: we have arts organizations; we have civic and human rights organizations; education; environment; health; public advocacy; religion; and social welfare. And that, I think, is a fair description of the diversity that makes up the independent sector. Blews: As we played the word association game, it was fascinating to see the number of different values that were identified with regard to the nonprofit sector. And I understand that in the study that you are conducting, that is, in fact, one of the things that you are compiling is, in a sense, a compendium of those values that are found within the nonprofit sector. Could you give us a checklist of those values? Well, the approach the steering committee took in its qiscussions was to try to evolve a set of values, social and cultural values, that the nonprofit sector embodies and nurtures. And I'd like to stress that this paper, thank you, that this paper is very much in the process of development; that the values that I'm about to describe are not finished, and that I'm very appreciative of the opportunity to be here -this morning, and I hope that this discussion is going to inform my further work in this area. The first value that we've described is called ... we're calling "Giving, Service and Community." And this value states something that we just heard all around this table this morning -- the basic moral obligation of people to care for and serve others. It ... As we're using the term, its defined 19 �., as the value that creates a fundamental sense of community. Without giving, without service, we don't have community. I \ The second value is "Pluralism. " And, in a sense, that's almost antithetical because at the same time that we're building community, we're also affirming the value of diversity, the ability within the community to speak out for other points of view. And that, I think, is one of the critical things that nonprofits must do. Nonprofits also, within the concept of pluralism, encourage individuals, encourage groups to come together to act on their own values and their own beliefs. They provide a structure for people to do that. I I "Civic Participation" is a third value. Again, its a way for individuals to come together to act for positive social change within our democratic structure, and in this way, and I think ~hat Dr. Payton mentioned this in his paper and again this morning, we're ... we are sustaining and renewing the democratic process. Without viable voluntary organizations, the democratic process would wither. The next value is the "Development of Human Potential." Most nonprofits exist in one way or another to a greater or lesser extent to help people to grow -- to be as good as they can be. In this value we have the commitment to excellence in education, to excellence in scholarship, to research, to artistic expression. We have a lot of other things in this value as well. The development of strong families, sound health, healthy environment, an overall positive moral character for people, altruism. / : /- . . ._ \) ~ ~~ ' \ )) \ "Compassionate Response to Human Need" is the next value. That's a very important one for the social services sector. Voluntary organizations are the ones who exist to mobilize community resources to care for the poor, the sick and the disabled, the elderly, others with special needs here in the United States and around the world. Finally, we have the value of "Faith." Its impossible to talk about the independent sector and ignore the importance of the religious community within it. And through the voluntary sector, we have churches and religious organizations which provide a means for people to practically express their faith. Religious organizations ... (tape stopped) / \) ') I 1 ,·' 1 \.· . " \ ... at least three others. One is the important role that nonprofits play as the protector of the legacies of past cultures, and I think that that is a critical role for the arts community. A second is that nonprofits play an important role in this country in providing perspective on the future. ~ince they're not bound by a profit motive, nonprofits are ) 20 I �able to guard the present, look to the future, hopefully to plan as we make transitions into the 21st century. And, finally, and I think that this is very important for nonprofit organizations to be themselves, to be architects and practitioners of ethical behavior. And this is a value ... I think the other values are ways in which nonprofits provide a structure for people to act. This particular value is one in which nonprofits themselves must set the example as a way, again going back to what Dr. Payton was saying a few minutes ago, as a way of teaching people trust. Blews: Bianco: Thank you. What's the reaction to those values? Mr. Bianco? r ' d - ' t wan t e Qn nse __ \ . j~ ' when we talk about what's difference between the third sector or the nonprofits and the other two sectors within the ynited States, that's one perspective. Auoteer perspectiy~ that I think ':! need to eyawilllO iit lii'i!EO pajnt jp these kjnds ol, djSCJ1§5ione 1 ooh:ia•A I iiHRkly hope 'nljll he on-going f..Qr <N.ite a 1ibne because I tn1nk there s a gxeat challenge to the tltttd sec LUL yotny we . bit in thiS . country today I and I hope . 9 (\ hQve tg compara• In the United States, as we well know, there is about 31 per cent of our Gross National Product that is consumed by taxes in the Gross National Product. The European example, as I'm sure many of you have studied these things probably more carefully than I have, have seen that about 41 per cent of the European Gross National Product is consumed in taxes . The European model is certainly, from a value point of view, has many of the same Christian and Judea-Christian values and motivations that are here in our society. I think those kinds of values are operative and strong influences on both sides of the Atlantic in that sense. But in the European models, clearly they have made a different decision. The third sector is certainly not as important there as it is in the United States, and they've made a decision to provide the basic kinds of caring services that Sister Monica referred to. T~ey've made a decision to provide for arts, for culture, for education, for all of those things; but they've chosen to provide it largely through federal government taxation and federal government programming. So in that sense, clearly we have a remarkably different model in the United States. And then I think we get into the question of, "Who delivers the service the best? What are the results?" It seems to me Charles had a results sign over there. Who delivers the results better? And I think that alone is a tremendous challenge to all of us in the nonprofit sector to think about/ iW--'~~,.s the int make is that ( 1) we re cle ly if en om h Eu pe mo to not ng Pro s or o bo t he 1 mo el· and wit ·n ur ntry, the he th sector and go ernmental 21 �Blews: Yamanishi: Mr. Ya.manishi. It seems to me that what Jan has put down here and what we're defining is not ... nonprofit sector is not quite as pure and as moral as we would like it to be. I don't think it is. The underlying assumption is, and historically, we had charities and the concept of charity was what was used. As a matter of fact, if you look at the history of nonprofits, the term charities used to be used in a ~ot of the names of organizations. The United Way had charities in its name previous to the time it changed to The United Fund. I think nonprofit sector can't be defined quite so pristine and purely. Its a dynamic. Its a force that's pushed between the private sector and the public sector, and you have institutions, organizations within the nonprofit sector that -are leaning one way or the other constantly. Its a dynamic that ... and you' 11 find organizations that are mimicking, maybe almost substantially, the private sector in the way in which they operate and the way in which they deal with benefits, personal benefits, they way in which they address problems, etc. And then you'll find other organizations that are much more allied with government and operate in a much more experience with community action agencies. And a lot of them that, even though they're private, nonprofit agencies, had solely government funding and had government people on their Boards as directors and so then they became much more of a political entity in the lo.cal community. So you have a dynamic and that's, I think that's what we created was a dynamic that helps us to define the fo~ces between the public sector and the private sector. That's where we ... ! think we should begin to look at the definition of what a nonprofit is. Slews: Yamanishi: Slews: Dr. Sederburg, for a number of years you represented that general public in the State Senate of the State of Michigan. Dr. Payton, in his paper, refers to a rather interesting term "teliopathy" -- the loss of mission or the disease of purpose which really goes to a values question also. What's your reaction to that? 22 �Sederburg: t \f\ Blews: ' Gee, Ed, I'm just delighted to be asked that question. What about a nice softball question like, "What do you think good is? or something like that? Teliopathy, of all things. Well, as I understand Dr. Payton's comments on teliopathy, its talking about lack of focus and loss of mission in organizations -- kind of a drift without a sense of mission. And I'll try and tie that in with what Herb said and then also with what Joe said. I think government is losing its sense of mission as to what the public really wants government to do. I really feel sorry for all these candidates running around running for President because the public is giving them totally mixed messages. Do they want National Health Care? Do they not want National Health Care? · Do they want Jobs programs? Do they not want Jobs programs? And ~ts such a mixed bag that government itself has lost its sense of mission and its causing all sorts of dislocations in the political system. -The mission is also central to this debate, in my op~n~on, because I'm going to be perhaps thrown out the room here with this, but I think the nonprofit sector is defined by what the others are not. You're the residue of everything else, and its driven by market functions. For-profit, when we look at it, the public sector, we look at what are the markets out there, those market niches, that we can go out there 4nd do some work and, hopefully, make enough to feed the kids. 1 Government looks at constituencies as a marketplace and so there's a constituency that develops; government will be there with that service. And so its driven ... Those two sectors are driven by market functions. The nonprofit ... nonprofit sector is driven not by markets but by good will and philanthropy and the desires of the individuals organizing it. Its a different direction, a different flow. And so the point that Dr. Payton made about mission, I think, is central to the whole debate, ~nd that is the definition of mission. Government is adrift. The private businesses are also having mission difficulties because of the changing economy and the world, global economic forces, etc. And so that's a tough debate going on. And the mjssion of nonprofit homes ... ! don't know why I keep saying nonprofit homes ... but nonprofit organizations is very, very tricky because everybody looks to you guys to catch everything that's left in between. And that's a very difficult type of situation. So how about that for an answer, Ed. Was that all right? That sounds interesting to me. I'd like to know what Ms. Work's reaction is to that speaking for New Detroit. Is your mission defined by what others don't do and, therefore, you do? You mentioned when we talked about values, you talked about service as the value that the nonprofit sector represents. 23 --- �Work a ~~~~r:~~~~l~~~ 4 en Jan said that - the nonprofits 'ctitioners, perhaps, of moral doings, I was taken back to had you asked me, I was going to say perhaps nonprofits are both the stimulator and the implementor of good deeds. Now New Detroit's mission is, of course, to try and ensure that the poor and the disadvantaged have a voice in what occurs to them and that they ... their human needs are well taken care of. But what Herb said earlier, I think, really applies here, too. Nonprofits depend often on where they get their money from. New Detroit gets a lot of business /corporate funding, but we have also had many, many grants that were government funded. And, I think, depending upon where your funding comes from, often you have to lean a little more toward the values and the practices of the sector that gives you the funding. Our mission, I would say, is to be a stimulator and a practitioner of good deeds. However, the business sector, who gives us a lot of funding and I think this is a good thing, is making sure that we become more businesslike and more effective in what we do. The government sector, when we have their costs of funding, wants us to be, obviously, a little more political depending upon where the funding is coming from, and also has a very different kind of bureaucratic view of how you spend your funds. So I would say that I think the nonprofit sector, indeed, has its own mission, but it is often one cannot separate the 3 and how one gets its funding and who funds you. Blews: All right. Senator Vaughn, we've talked about values and we've talked about the mission of the nonprofit sector. As a Senator, how important do you consider those values and that mission to be? Vaughn: I consider them to be extremely, but I'm more confused now than ever. I have a constituency here and back home and so I'm constantly pulled in all directions. If you noted when you asked me the original question, I said nonprofit is good f9r all. Its the first thing that came in my mind. And then I had a little notation, though. Things held in common. It doesn't benefit the left or the right. I should rise above my own ethnicity or political persuasion and do what is right. And I find that in listening here to all of you, I want to be reelected and I consider that as one of ~y missions -- and w~ talked about mission -- and yet I want to be liked and I want to be loved and I want to do what is right, so I'm torn between the forces, but I never lose sight of the fact of why I'm here. I'm here to help for all, for a people and to rise above my own ethnicity and my own political persuasion and try t.9 s~y, :·wJtat: Hould benefit society mu~!l bet:_ter?_•:_j So~e I ss n 1s lea~ _ thi , ut . _no leap · -m~o es . . ~ ...::_ ·_ /l \ \. ~) I ? I I - ___......--#~ --- - - - - - 24 - - , �Senator, you raise a very important and a new point, and that is that in order for a Legislator to serve that public good or that good for all that you described, that Legislator also must be reelected from time to time. This, after all, is a democratic system. Representative Kosteva, with your constituency, is there a value placed on the nonprofit sector on the kinds of missions that we've described such that you can, as a Legislator, be a proponent of the nonprofit sector and still be reelected? Kosteva: Clearly, because many of the purposes that the nonprofit sector and the governmental sector strive to achieve are so similar. The benefit of all, the public improvement, the ability to advance human potential, to respect the diversity of our nature and of our culture and institutions, I think that's very easily done. The beauty of the nonprofit sector, in my eyes, is that it allows the individual choice to be ~ade. The individual choice on the part of individuals to be able to pursue the nonprofit contributions and roles and volunteerism that they individually choose to participate in. It allows them to advocate for those particular causes, and with that advocacy and that participation and that choice comes a commitment to those causes. And so I think its one of the fullest expressions of the participatory democracy that Jefferson brought to this country. So clearly, to the degree that the government sometimes deals with the collective good, the nonprofit sector, I think, their well-defined mission at the present time, on a more individual basis, I believe is more well-defined than the governmental sector and the business sector as it comes to social concerns. I think they're very, very compatible with constituent concerns as an elected official. Blews: Dr. Mawby, you're on the funding side as the President and Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, of the Kellogg Foundation. Are the values that you have heard and the missions that you have heard worthy of your support? Are they the kinds of values and the kinds of missions that do w~rrant the support from a foundation such as yours? Mawby: Well, we, as a grant-making foundation, of course, work very closely and share, in general, the values of the nonprofit sector. Under laws established by legislative groups at the state and federal level, the nonprofit sector is defined and we, as grant makers, have the opportunity of giving funds to nonprofit institutions and organizations and to all of the units of government. So its very often a collaboration and you have to say that, as you look at society over the past 10, 20, 30 and 40 decades, the role of the various sectors continue to be dynamic and evolutionary. We passed federal legislation with funding which provides for positions labeled volunteer which are paid. And that, you know, results in some 25 �confusion. So its an evolutionary process. Simplistically, it seems to me, the nonprofit sector represents all of those 'institutions, organizations, and programs which include private initiative for the public good. And certainly the kinds of values that have been described on the cards and in the discussion are certainly consistent with the kind of a mission that we see as the particular role of grant makers in the whole collage. Blews: · Miller: Very good. How ... How well does business and how well does the government sector understand the nonprofit sector, let's say on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being low level of understanding and 5 being a high level of understanding, Mrs. Miller, as a former State Legislator yourself, how would you rate the understanding of the government sector and how a ·leader in government, in the executive branch, how well does government understand the nonprofit sector? I'm not certain it understands it very well at all. I would put that on a rather low side in terms of maybe a 2. Just looking at it from my current position, and even having been a community leader and volunteer in my own community, I find that government has a very difficult time being sensitive to human needs and to human value, and I think that's one of the frustrations that I feel in dealing with the governmental system now as on the administrative side as opposed to the legislative side, because we can become too isolated there from what the needs of the community are and then to better provide the leadership that I believe is needed from the government sector. Because as people have said around in several different ways as we have talked this morning, that government and business provide the direction, divide the impetus, the influence as to how a nonprofit may go. And if we don't have the leadership and the understanding of the purpose of the nonprofit, we're not able to provide the leadership that's needed. And, I guess, that's what I'm hoping in terms of my role as the relatively new kid on the block in terms of the administration of government, that we c~n bring more sensitivity to that. Blews: Mr. Cox, from a business perspective, same scale, how well does business understand the nonprofit sector? Cox: I think the business community understands the nonprofit sector very well. Each business organization certainly recognizes their own corporate responsibility to the nonprofit sector. And that's limited by their own personal resources, obviously, and as you go through a time much like we're in today, the amount of resources available for distribution becomes limited. And, you know, they have the same compassion and the same social concerns that all of us have. But its a matter of meeting the payroll or donating to nonprofit 26 .I �organizations. And their obligation, obviously, is to meet the payroll as best they can. But, no, they understand very well. There's a concern about how much of the tax dollar should be devoted to that as well. And you can't do both. You can't continue to raise taxes and then continue to expect the corporate ... the business community to find the means to solve all of the problems. Bianco: Ed, can I take a contrary view to that? Blews: Sure. Bianco: My good friend, E.L., who has always been a good contributor to the museum, it may be over after this comment ..• From my perspective and the years I spent in business, and certainly E.L. and had many, many years of exchanges together, I would say that business in the '90's is going to continue its _ chal~enge of down-sizing, right-sizing, whatever the term is going to be. As that continues, I see the corporate sector having less and less of the executive time and staff time available for volunteer ism. I think the pressures of the marketplace on our corporate structure are so severe at this point, and will continue to et · · a lobal ...c.om~t.!tive enviroruq~nt. An tnat' s Oiie- of -the - reas ~ · f w· n abo &- d · f J b we~n Euro a §YS our's be se· 1. ~~ a ha se · · ...-Buf I e corporate sector is going to be able ess. I agree with you, E.L. Like all the rest of us, corporate executives are sensitive human beings, in many cases not all. Like all the rest of society, and will take some personal interest and follow through in the nonprofit sector. But I also think we're going to see such a great pressure on profits -- we're already seeing it -- and I think that will continue through the '90's to the point where, I don't know what the current numbers are, Russ, but it seems to me the last conference board report I read, corporate contributions were 5 or 6 per cent, something like that, of the total. ·a. Mawby: That's correct. Bianco: And then foundations were another 5 or 6 per cent. So even at this point, if the corporations make up 5 or 6 per cent of the total giving pot, and that averages out at 1.6 per cent or -some number like that of pre-tax profits, if I remember that ~umber correctly also, that's a fairly small contribution out of the profits of the corporations. And if they're going to be under competitive pressure for new plant investment, for new equipment investment, they're going to have to make a simple choice. Do I give the money away, or do I reinvest in a new plant or a piece of equipment or something like that? And my point is that in the competitive, non-oligopoli~tic, 27 �non-monopoly market that the United States now finds itself competing in, the decisions, I think, are more and more going to tend toward, "Our basic job is to provide employment. Our job is to provide products and services tor this country, and more of our money has got to go in that direction." So I think there's caring there. I think there are some wonderful people to be reached. But I think the challenge to the nonprofits is going to be tremendous to make their case in a very competitive, very sensible way, because I think the corporate pot is going to be smaller both in terms of peopl~ as well as money. Blews: Part of making that case is to understand what impact the nonprofit sector has within a state such as Michigan. And we have with us a scholar, Dr. Mark Wilson, who is the Director of the nonprofit Michigan Project at MSU and who has been conducting the first study of the nonprofit sector within our state. Dr. Wilson, to bring this to a sense of closure in this identification panel, what can you tell us about the impact and what do you know so far about the size of the nonprofit sector in the State of Michigan? Wilson: I think the reason I said that it was invisible was the reaction of being a researcher trying to find information on nonprofits. Its very hard to even find out where it is and how big it is. So the impact of nonprofits is very, very difficult to gauge because we don't have a clear idea of what they do or how much they do or even where they operate. We can ... To give you an example, we find about 3,000 nonprofit organizations in the state that employ someone, and they employ about a quarter of a million workers, a little more than 5 per cent of the workforce. And that's almost easy to find out about. It was, compared to the rest of the nonprofit sector, that was easy. But it made you think about what else is the nonprofit sector doing? Well there are another 20 or 30,000 nonprofits in the state that have perhaps been r~gistered or perhaps taken on charges or have organized themselves formally, and so that's another level of nonprofit action. And then we did a case study of Calhoun County and found there were 5 to 10 nonprofits that didn't even register, that didn't even recognize themselves in a formal way. -L~~ 't see 1 . p<;>npr9fit sec.tor ..tend~ !-q be invisible. We so ne. e 1 ha e a v~ · fo 1, or t9e ~ unit group etfer omethin The small so ial groups . C re roups . p through t cracks. 28 �employees in Michigan in 1990, that nonprofit organi~ation$ - - -are generating far more employment growth than perhaps you would expect, they're about 5 per cent of the sector, but they're about 10 or 15 per cent of all the new jobs in Michigan. But beyond that, that's just really the visible, formal nonprofit sector. The invisible nonprofit sector i~ equally important, but we ju~t can't get a clear idea of what it is and where it is. Blews; Mr. Anderson, from your perspective with the Detroit Urban League, what's your reaction to all of this? Anderson: -- J - -Blews: -· I - - -- ... .... And that really leads us o our discussion which is talking about the relat~ the 3 sectors. But before we jump to that, we would like to invite anybody from the audience, if you would like to dive into the dialogue, this is an opportunity for you to do so. int~ And please identify yourself and your organization. Young: . Good morning. I'm Leonard Young. I represent the Michigan Ecumenical Forum on the Nonprofit Forum Board. I have a rather specific question that I want to ask about identity. Now we've been talking all morning and there seems to be some general agreement around the table about what identifies a nonprofit. But in my experience and in many of our experiences in nonprofit organizations, that consensus seems to break down when you come to the practical level, particularly in the relationship between government entities and agencies and nonprofits, and what actually defines a nonprofit. Let me give you several examples of what I mean. 29 f �There's one set of criteria for the IRS to determine whether an organization is nonprofit. There is an entirely different set of criteria that the u.s. Postal Service uses to determine if an organization is nonprofit and can use bulk mailing privileges. In the State of Michigan there is an entirely different set to determine whether you are exempt from sales tax or property tax in different areas. And yet again in the Attorney General's office there is an entirely separate set of criteria used to determine whether you have to apply for a charitable solicitation license or not. For a lot of organizations, especially small, locally based ones like Mr, Wilson was talking about a minute ago, considerable hardship is wreaked on those organizations in trying to sort out how all of the different entities of government and agencies look at and define nonprofit organizations. I would be ·interested in the Attorney General's office commenting a little on that from their point of view and any of the others who see how we might be able to get some kind of a consistent micro - definition of what nonprofit organizations ar~, and as we began when Representative Bandstra talked about being accountable, a single way of doing that so that people know how they may respond to inquiries and to be appropriately judged and scrutinized as Mr. Anderson was saying. We need some single set of criteria for determining thos~. Blews; Mr. Hoffecker, you're the Assistant Attorney General with the Charitable Trust Department in the Attorney General's office, Your reaction. Hoffecker: Well, its a good question and one I, frankly, welcome. We view the nonprofit sector as a method by which the tremendou~ social energy that we have in this country can be channelled and moved into doing the virtuous, good things that we've all mentioned this morning. Government, in my view, and strictly my view, should be as unintrusive as possible. I think we have a duty to guard the public against fraud, because there is charitable fraud -- it does exist, So you need some standard and some mechanism to deal with fraud. Beyond that, i~ my view, there shouldn't be any exemptions. The fact that some organization is religious in nature, and we have this concept of separation of church and s ·t ate, that should not by itself exempt the organization from letting the government know that it is out there in a nonprofit charitable function, how much money its taking in and how much its spending. ~vernment shouldn't say you have to take in, if you take in this much, you have to spend that much on your charitable purpose. That's going to be a decision for the public. If the public has access to information about the nonprofit sector, what they're doing with their income, making 101 pennies out of 100 pennies, people, I think, can make reasonable decisions on where to spend their money or, as money gets tight, more importantly, spend their time by 30 �volunteering with an organization, and make the whole process a lot better. The current statutory scheme, I think, started out as a governmental way to kind of nurture nonprofi ts. Okay, we ll make them tax exempt. We'll give them a break on certain kinds of property. To encourage people to make donations to certain kinds of charities, they get a tax deduction against their income taxes for making a donation. Well government should nurture good works that way. On the regulatory side, and that's where I come as a regulator, we need to protect the public from fraud and provide a mechanism for information for the public so that they can make decisions on what to do with their time and money without regard to whether the organization is a church, a school, a United Way en~.i sr~ or _!!!!.,~:!!;;,.!~..2£..!!.9.~ffwOf.~~.. ~;"';:2~~i.~.a~i?~.: . . , . '* 1 ·- r:; Blews: we need a morp co sistent legal definition across the _ ~ious units ~gover ent of what a nonprofit i5? t Hoffecker: 1~, ).'n consiste y is a h llmark o governm nt, but we need som basic enets tha every ody can 1 k to an 7 I know at ur 1 el, with l:he C aritable So ' c'tatio Act, we look to the 01C3 status th Internal Rev n ~ Se ice. So we try t be onsistent wit t We're tryi g ,to ' ake our organizati perate on the form with the RS . . That makes it ea · er for organizat ons. One docum ~ If we're all looking t the same docume it makes it eas for the organizatio , it makes it ea ie for the public, apd we're all lo in at the s e umbers. Arran9 nt, of the numbers n a form can ch nge oples perc~p · io s \ about organiza ons. In terms f the ostal Servi e, 'm\ not sure wha their gulation are, bu sure, bein a '?OlC3 is a b' part of · t. If e focus on as t 'tant, then think we an de with the o I I gues Y ahhi thin r 1 1 tn! Blews: .·· At •t his pp(• nt, hen, we ill take a brea We will reconvene, we wii ~ ,/ try to reconvene by 10:45, so please be quick and brief. / (Break) 31 • �ews: (Resumed Summit- 10:56 a.m.) ... public here. I'd like to say a word to our ~anel and then I' 11 say a word as the pr ram itself begins a9ain . And thank yo very much. You've don a very good job ~n the first stage here f helping us to set t e foundation aqd to deal w~some issues identity. Our al now, at p he second and third stages, is eally to allow e discuss~on to bec~much more free-wheelin And please argive ~e, with ~fie lights and all, sometimes don ' t catch the s~gnals t~ come from you. So feel free to ve your ca d qr' scre~.J'Cind yell and we'll try to get a chance o recogn ~eeveryPne. But do feel f ree to just jump in free in th' disc~ssion as we go. And my role, rather than to p 1 o b ·· the reins will be, when necessary, to perhaps rein; ' hi just a • . . just· a touch. / the discussion, ~ yo Yes, a s correc . r d ,t! ~ i _real compelled to go .to~ e mi even if its not a point we'll try to get to you where we've invited ~ h~~, you rna as quickly as we n, and the w will also provide an opportunity at t;h end for audi nee rticipation at that point. ~ c Yes, Maryel~ . / 1 wi.s: And I b · ~J-eve we may go on past ews: Yes. ~ n fact, we may go closer to 2:30. Lunch is We' Jy· announce that again in th room next door. :We' 11 ~unce that again at the appropr ate time. At this point / ......_._~;~w,..~.._,IL"l*-~~ee~t:li*a t;,g t.he-&alllQo5e&, - - -,- - . - -· - -- - .·- , __; In the first stage of our session today, we've had really a marvelous discussion about the identity of the nonprofit sector and perhaps some lack of identity or some confusion about identity. Who are we? What are we? What does that matter in terms of the relationship between the 3 sectors -government, business and the nonprofit sector -- that are r~presented around this table before us? At this point we're going to become a bit less structured in our dialogue. We have here a panel of persons who are very distinguished leaders and, certainly, feel very freely, as they should, to speak their minds, and we're going to give them the opportunity to do that in this next session, and then in the third session. Stage 2 of our discussion, though, deals with relationships. The government/business/nonprofit partnership, the question of whether there is such a partnership, whether there should be such a partnership. How is it changing, particularly in these difficult fiscal times and these difficult economic days? 32 �What are the issues, the tensions and the ramifications? Having talked about the identity ... the identity of the nonprofit sector, we now want to examine that in the context of these very, very important relationships. One of the people at our table here who certainly deals day in and day out with that kind of relationship is Mr. Robert Ivory, the President of the Unit~d Way of Michigan. Mr. Ivory, of course, is representing and serving through his organization, serving community organizations. The nonprofit sector, in its attempt to secure support and funding in dealing in that process very closely with the business community or the for-profit sector. Mr. Ivory, how would you assess the current relationship between the business community and the nonprofit sector? Is it a good relationship? Is it a bad relationship? .~ --- Ivory: -Is this in the ( -a ch e to ad OS_Pb t. usi ationshi o nited ways, a very g1ft and benefit in terms of philanthropy. In a sense, when you talk about both workplace solicitation and payroll deduction, when you put those 2 things together, that yields, usually, people talk about that being a 9 to 10 times yield over asking someone for an individual gift at any given moment in time. So the notion of having access to the workplace and to employees for solicitation and coupling that with payroll deduction has been a very strong element of the United Way system. It also is incumbent upon United Way, in order to encourage that relationship and to maintain that, is to take a lo9k at the trust that United Ways bring to the business community and to the community at large. In terms of the package of services that it brings to the workplace, and that has ... therein is a major controversy today within the United Way system, even outside of the most recent news events about the national pf"esident, there has been a major controversy within the United Way system in the last 2 or 3 years around the whole notion of choice and opening up the number of agencies that are brought into the United Way system, into the workplace. And that companies, and particularly again in the public sector, have asked that the number of agencies, the number of ~harities represented, for instance, in an organization like United Way, in fact, not be limited to a few select organizations but, in fact, be opened to a much broader base of charitable organizations. The phenomenon i s in this country as someone alluded to earlier that, in fact, we've had just an explosion of nonprofits in this country since the '60's. And there are more and more agencies who are looking to the workplace, for instance, as the method of increasing 33 �their funding. And so the pressure on United Ways today is, "What type of package do you take to the workplace to have continued credibility with the business community that you're offering a product that, in fact, is not limited to a f~w select agencies but, in fact, brings in a package of s~rvices that meet the broadest ray of co~unity good. Its interesting, in my view, one of the characteristics that we ... that make us somewhat invisible that we need to, in fact, market is one of the hallmark characteristics of the nonprofit sector is, in fact, the volunteer force. And I've always been impressed to hear George Romney talk about that volunte~r commitment and the ownership, whether we talk about it as the participatory principle of people beco~ing involved in our community issues remains a major issue for United Ways to continue working with the business community for that type of leadership and commitment to some of the community issues, So, in short, one of the things that's happening to us within the United Way system is to continue to look at that -relationship that we have with the business community in terma of presenting a package of services, a benefit that, in fact, benefits a much broader community base than a few select organizations. Blews: Mr. Cantrell, you ... you represent volunteer agencies. Mr. Ivory has talked about the important role of volunteerism. How does that relationship between the 3 sectors affect the volunteer activity in this society? Cantrell: It affects it in a very positive way. One of the things I would like to address before answering your question is the whole point of where human services, private sector, came from -- this whole idea of human services. It started with people before we had any programs, any professionals, we had volunteers who saw a problem and went out and tried to do something to cure or aid in that particular situation. One of the things I see that that whole pioneer spirit is somewhat dying. And its dying under the auspices of existing organizations, often times, in that the volunteer sees a p_roblem and tries to bring their problem forward. There seems to be now territories among agencies and if its working with children, then you're touching upon some child serving agencies. If its dealing with the homeless, some existing organizations see it. Whether or not they are behind that particular attempt to start an organization or to carry some -special type of service through has a profound impact on whether or not that program will ever get off the ground. And I see that dying in some of the communities I'm working with. As people bring forth programs, they are actually being smothered under the weight of existing programs who are goin to be ... see them as contenders for dollars. -· ··-··-- 'r· et in 34 · we- ~'ll �I think in terms of the overall relationship from a corporate standpoint, we hear often times corporations talking about being a good corporate neighbor. But often times when confronted with, "What exactly do you mean by that and what exactly ... what type of activities will you involve yourself in to ... to prove that?" Often times, you' 11 get a .•. not the type of answer you may be looking for. In terms of government, not to be a complainer or anything but they tend to kill creativity. One of the things that I see that is hurtinq nonprofits right now is the fact that creativity is being smothered under the weight of paperwork, under the weight of restrictio d that type of thing~ . A,pd I get a lot Slf -~Q&P ¥ichis•a WRi6L~iey ~RQ a~~~duating 35 �\ Reactions to that. Jan? J Gallagher: / I'd like to talk for a minute about some national and state trends that, I think, are going to affect the development of / government/business/nonprofit partnerships over the next 10 i years. Its not, I think, going to be news to anybody in this room, but I think it might be helpful to remind us all, The President's budget proposal, factored out over the next 5 years, is projecting declines in federal spending for education and training, for social services, for transportation, for community and regional development. The only thing that's projected to grow in t~e. President's budget is medical care, federal spending for medical care. The most recent, valid data on what's happening at the state level comes from a mid-December survey by the National Con-f erence of State Legislatures. At that point, 30 states were receiving less revenue than they needed to balance their budget. More ~han half the states were reporting expenditure~ for entitlement programs or education or both at a higher rate than budgeted. There were very few state reserves left because most of the states had spent them in 1991. There is an increased demand for social services, and a lot of states are cutting aid to local government as one way of balancing their budgets. Its a terrible picture. But it also is going to force substantial changes in how we deliver services, and its going to force changes in the partnerships. There's not going to be federal money. There's not going to be state money. It looks like there's not going to be local money in the short run. Someone is going to have to pick up the slack, and only nonprofit organizations are left. And that's going to, I think, force nonprofits to do exactly the things that Mr . Cantrell, I think, if I got the name from this ... that's right ... was just talking about and that is find new approaches to deliveries of services, to decategorize existing programs, to look at innovative, creative, community-based solutions to problems. Slews: Councilman Benavides, from a local government standpoint, wl)at' s your reaction? Are you seeing the same trend occurring there? And how do you see the partnership shaping up? Benavides: Well, first of all I think that we have a tremendous job in trying to educate government as to what our actually nonprofit organizations are. I see the ... there is various types of nonprofit. In terms of services, those that provide the traditional services that are commonly known to everyone, and then there is the others that are non-traditional where we take the people as we are. The problems, I think, that we have sometimes when we try to get grants and things of that kind, the first word that comes up is "duplication." You're duplicating with so-and-so. You're duplicating with this other person. And what ... what they need to know, they need to 36 �I d I \3 I •I ~ 1', .•' " I I J /\ get educated as to exactly what it is that that agency does and why. And so that ... it seems to me like this type of forum has a tremendous job, along with us, to try to educate that ~n~~lar~~tor •.J I just wanted to say a little bit about ' the United Way politics in terms of opening it up to everyone, I've been an agency director for 22 years in Lansing and I have seen many people come and go. And I know that at one time we had like maybe no more than 10 or 15 agencies. Today we got like 100. That's fine. The more, the merri~r. I think competition is good. I used to be a grqcery clerk and they used to tell me that the best thing to do is to have someone across the street that would give you competition. But, you know, one of the things that the designations, I don't know that he mentioned it, the agency designation where you designate who do you want that particular donation to go to. I have been quite concerned about that. I got my numbers from the local United Way and they were increased a little bit from the last time. But I think, you know, that deep in the living rooms or bedrooms or wherever these people are making those decisions, there seem to be a tendency, if they don't know anything about your agency, they don't know anything about what you do, or they ... they seem to designate that and I can see a lot of these designations going to a block type ot agencies in this community. And I think that if, in fact, we're gonna look at all of those as agency designations should be one. Let me say that government, I think, that its always has a tendency, and being an elected official for 10 years in the City of Lansing, I'm an advocate of human services. I work for one and I truly believe that this is where we gotta go. But I think, you know, we have the tendency to leave the human services, to leave our drugs and crime and health services to the United Way, to the foundations, to "let George do it" type of attitude. I have always advocated that we need to be responsible, that the city government, county government, and state government needs to be responsible and we need to set aside, just like we set aside for everything else, we need to set aside dollars that are gonna go to nonprofit organizations that are providing the services to t~is community. I have to believe that if we can educate ·~ and we can get 'em jobs and we can get 'em the help they need, the whole economic and social quality of life in our community will change. Blews; Dr. Mawby. Mawby; Well, I find it useful from time to time to remind myself of sort of a fundamental interrelationship or interdependence of these three sectors. That, in fact, the governmental and the nonprofit sectors are fully dependent for their resources upon the vitality, the success if you please, of the other sector And its only as business is successful that - business. government can generate its resources. Its only as business 37 �I I / is successful that employees then have the where-with-all -85 per cent or so of giving is by individuals. Its not by corporations and its not by foundations, its by individuals. And so the vitality, the success of all of society depends upon that generating force. I was ... And @O public policy then in effect decides how those resources are going to be mobilized to serve the public good. We tax to do certain things. And in those decisions, we can provide incentives or disincentives for voluntary giving. And so as an individual then, part of my contribution to society at large is through the taxe~ I; a and ar _qf ..it I-h;;'Qu h th~ ~ha;it;y, _t ~yl:ng was ntr1gue e 1er ~ ~ a he· wcf ~ co it;; " c !JP~ ema ks een ~~~~o~u~t~t~h~e~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ h mmu ,_~ cause 1 seems o m tor 1ng responsibility to higher and higher to Lansing and then to Washington, saying th~t the government or the state government ought to do these things. I think society in this period now is becoming somewhat disenchanted. We've poured massive resources into governmental efforts and I think there'~,; been some degree of frustration and dissatisfaction with the consequences. And increasingly I hear Washington saying about, "That's the state's responsibility," and Lansing sAying, ''That's really 1 you know, the county, the city, the comm~nity's responsibility. " Now there's going to be a very awkward transition here in public policy of reallocating the r~sourc~s to do the job. But if that's the direction th~t American society is really moving, then I subscribe flllly to that because I think at the community level we're able to respond most effectively to community needs. Then we've got on awkward period of transition wher~ responsibility is being shifted, the resources have not yet been reallocated, but l think it repreoents, again, that interrelationship of these ~ components of the larger picture. Blewsa ijoffecker: Mr, Hoffecker. L think that's an excellent point . . The nonprofit sector can do something that government and business can't do and that's, in my opinion, react quickly to changing social needs. One of my frustrations in government with one of the other hats that I wear in the office is that we're always reacting to something after the problem and the harm has occurred in .- .•• that's in my efforts in the Consumer Protection a~ea, Very seldom are we fortunate enough to get people with enough knowledge so they avoid the problem. The problem happens. They come to government. Nonprofits are ... can have the chance to be proactive. Look ahead. Sense what's going on and th~n try to deal with it. Government and business can try to facilitate that by allowing access to the workplace and payroll deduction to fund programs, to guard against fraud in 38 �and making information u '. ~ Blewsa Mru • Up john, you re both o. business pereon, a buu in~s s leader 1 and a community leader. What do you think apout this? Upjohn: Well, I support what you say very strongly becauee l think _that the nonprofit sector is the only game in town that can take risks. We need new kinds of solutions for some of these problems. We need more collaborative efforts where agencie~ come together. Each of them may be doing what they do bes~, and working together to bring social energy to the problQms that beset us. And for government its too ponderous and for the business community it is really not their function. aut that s where our power and our ability to set the agenda comes, I feel, 1 1 Blews: We then do go to the question of who pays. And earlier in the discussion there was a reference made to the fact that the primary -- the first responsibility of the business commun!ty is to its employees and to their benefits and compensation. And then, of course, there's the issue of shareholders il\ large corporations. Mr. Roehrig, you represent a part of the labor community. From your perspective, how should businees balance its obligation to its employees and does it have an obligation to the broa4er community through the nonprofit sector in the use of its resources? Roehrig: 39 �Blews: Reactions to that from the nonprofit sector. Anderson: want to make a quick response, because I think it p~obably one question that all of us ought to think about. Knowing our options when you talk about that in the United Way, for example, isn't really just a donor convenience. Because if you feel strongly enough about the Detroit Urban League or the Urban League, and we've had discussions nationally, you could write A check directly to me and it will be tax deductible and I don't need a third party to field th4~ money to me. So if you're talking about donor options, yQu may really be talking about donor conveniences and I think h~'s right, that you really just open up a Pandora's box and have people inundated, because a lot Qt us get matl all the time directly from people soliciting funds and then I see the United Way, for example, and others who put out money as people who really have taken some tilue to study what the issues are and try to prioritize funding those needs in a community, and not just letting it run all over the place. So I would think that somehow or another, if you have all of ~ sudden 300 entities seeking money in this corporation, yo~ really are talking about donor convenience" a~ opposed to donor options. I rai~es Mr~ . Miller. 40 Mr. And~r~on? �/ J I'd like to build on some things that everybody na~ said he~e because I think when we're talking about donor options or donor conveniences, we're talking ... we're really talking about a problem that I think we have across the board in terms of looking at what Mrs. Up john eaid about collaboration, what Jan said about creativity, what Mr. Mawpy soid about community, I think we've got to look at coopera.tion, we've got to look at communication, we've got to look at coordination, and they can't be just nice little concepts that we sit here and talk about on the table. I mean, we've got to go out and actively pursue those relations and develop tha~ . communication eo that there isn't the inundation with donations, that there isn't the duplication of services that someone··mentioned •.. mentioned here. I think that we've got to move.,.move forward because in a time of limited resources, whether its limited resources from the public sector or limited resources from the private sector, we're talking about money. But there's also _information, there are also people. And I think we have to begin to work together and I take this .•. ! give you an example in the public sector in what I do in the Ombudsman's Office. I came in at the beginning of last yea~, and I won't give you the whole long story. But in essence, what happened in our office, we had to reprioritize, we had to refocus, we had to down-size, and as a result of what we have done, we found a new direction, a new purpose and a better service. . And I think this is what this time of limited resources is all about in terms of both government, in terms of the nonprofits and in terms of the business community. And alone we can't do it, but together we have to come and do it and get it done. And I think we're being forced to do it, because its the only way we have to go now. The money's not there. Slews: Epolito: Mr. Epolito. Yeah, just very briefly, I think we've talked about a Qg!;ne;_ship- that- ~0:~ nQ.t~~~t. _.If~~~~~~~=;=~~ { l!~Ai~t&' a:;tra.gment A?ue·aaei:n~;o. ; ; : ..£J_§~ ~ ~ tsfef§ !A::iiEtlaieth-hr'fnist1iil' . \it~I think that the one ~fiing that a partnership can do, and certainly the United Way has proven this, is to set some priorities. On my desk in my office sits about, I don't know, $15,000 or $20,000 worth of requests for funding. We set up a Corporate Giving Committee and as to where we're going to allocate our resources, At the same time, our employees are inundated with requests and I -have everything from a $500 tuxedo affair evening for the Humane Society to save dogs and cats, and I'm not criticizing that because its a major priority for some people, but we have people starving. We have homeles~ in the streets. We, as a corporation, we, as individuals, have got to set some priorities as to what's important to us in this society. So I think this whole issue ot what can the partnership do, if, ~ partnership is created, ~think the .partnership could give 41 ~ 1• .~ ·i �some leadership to setting some priorities and really get to some of the bottom line issues and give some of the focus that we're lacking. Yamanishi: Blews: Dr. Clark, discussion. Clark: And I want to build on what was just said, because certainly for the health care industry, and hospitals in particular, in · Michigan and the United States, this involvement between a not-for-profit hospital and the governmental agencies that both regulate and increasingly reimburse has been an uneasy situation with tensions on both sides; and it certainly is not getting any better. If you put a little historical perspective on it, the relationship was between hospitals and you bring a health ca+e perspective 42 --· ~==-=- to the �government, with business a distance away. That is changing as well so that the triumvirate, as we are talking about !t here, is not becoming increasingly interrelated. And from the hospitals' perspective, we function as nonprofit. At the same time the government regulation is so extreme that the very flexibility that we've all been talking about in meeting the needs of the local community is increaeingly removed from the hospitals to be able to do that. At the same time, with the shrinking reimbursement, both from the public sector and from ' ' business, you have an increased constraint on what the abilities are for any individual institution to meet those I. needs -- even at the best of times. ~'d like to be able to take the suggestion that was made by Judy Miller that this Forum, and by Aaron, that this was exactly the tim~ at which we should be most inventive. But I don't think I have a tremendous amount of sense that that is going to occur in 1 health care as health care has come to be in the United States ...today. If you consider, in Michigan, that besides being nonprofit with all the things that that means, that in addition to that there is over $400 million of care in charity care that's given every year -- over $1 million a day -- and that doesn't even count what's not being reimbursed by the mandated federal and state programs. You are talking about a situation where the squeeze is coming from both sides, and the ability to respond to that in inventive and new ways is l shrinking as well because of governmental constraints and · regulations. JHewe: Ms. Work. Work: I'd just like to say that it appears as though the nonprofits . have been given the mandate to take c~re of crucial problems that are growing and that are not getting smaller, and that it is truly a mandate without money. Now I understand, and we • have been hearing at New Detroit, that we must poordinate, we must have collaborative efforts. I agree with that and I think the nonprofits have to coordinate and collaporate to the best of their ability. Then we hear no duplication of services. Perhaps there should be some duplication in order to cover all the problems, and I don't mean duplication that is a bad thing, but how much do we come together and collaborate and coordinate to the extent that we not fulfilling our mandate and handling all of those problems out there? Some duplication might be a good thing in order to ·handle all of. p;p;>blems. It is a v toygh.._ ma_!!~ate an 43 �,- - '- I services and human needs against the arts. We're going to be pitting more things against each other, I think, unless we take a really good look at policy issues. Slews: Mr. Bianco. Bianco: Before I mentioned that I did not think that during the Reagan years or now even during the Bush years the federal government is doing what it can to encourage activity in the. nonprofit sector. When we heard the rhetoric in the early '80's that the private sector must do more, individuals must do more, we were reminded by Russ that the giving is largely by _individuals. But yet during the Reagan Administration and the ta~ reform as all of us in this room know, the whole itemized deduction was taken away essentially for about 75 per cent of tax filers. As far as I know, about 25 per cent of the people itemize, somebody might back me up on that number. And so we took the federal incentive to give. We took the policy that said, "Its '1--~t~~~~...::=~t'""~~~~~~~~~~'¥-:~~~~~~ ou t . ~ Point ITUrnher~ on 1s 1s, and if there ~s going to pe 44 \ �'90's, then we need some more Why shouldn't that deduction that is truly Blews: Bandstra: -Representative Bandstra. Yeah, I think you're right, that we do have a hodge podge approach at the state level. I'm sure you're aware that we do have a limited tax credit in place for community foundations and p~rt of the bill that reinvigorated that tax credit specified that we want to do a study of the way other states structure their tax incentives for cha ize the problem here in Lansin .-1-~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~e-~~~~~~~r1Ar~~e=~~~nna~fa~~~:th-in Kosteva: I go back to Joe's point that you raised much, much earlier and that is answering the question of who delivers the results the best. If we would choose, if government makes the conscious decision to, let's say, broaden the deductibility of certain contributions, clearly that tax expenditure will cost the state government, and we will be making the conscious d~cision that Jan has talked about in terms of the e~ended pressure that state government is facing. Lois mentioned about the fact that we're pitting social services versus the arts at the present time. So if we make the conscious decision to expand the deductions and the expenditures that that can go for that will reduce the state dollars th~t will, therefore, go to social services so we, therefore, will be making the conscious decision that government has decided that somebody else, the nonprofit sector, will deliver these results better than the centralized state or federal government will. So I'm not certain if our society ... our collective society of whom Rick and I and others are reflective of that as their representatives .•• have made that decision. I think that ... ! think that they're pushing us in 45 �Blews; Senator Sederburg, as a former legislator, what counsel would you offer to this ... this gauntlet that has been laid down for the current Legislature? · Sederburg: Well, I think we're in the midst of a rewriting of the social contract in the state of Michigan. Michigan has a history and a tradition similar to Wisconsin and Minnesota of a public _that wanted public services valued, a good public infrastructure, liked high quality educational institutions, liked to fund the arts, etc. But I think we may be in the midst of a change of attitude and we may be moving more to an Indiana - Ohio type of environment in which the public says we're going to rely on the individual to make decisions and to succeed individually and we're not going to look to government to provide services, and I think that the public may be moving away from the leadership of the state. And the people around the panel and all of us probably on the bottom line feel that the government really has a role to play in providing leadership and providing some high level governmental services that we can be proud of. Joe's point in Europe, you go to Europe and people are proud of the infrastructure of the public buildings and the public transportation systems and the public image is there. I ran into a friend of mine from Minneapolis the other day and we were talking about high taxes in Minnesota, and he said, "Yeah, we have high taxes in Minnesota but we're proud of the park system and the road system and the infrastructure that we have. " I'm afraid that's changing in Michigan and the message that Jim Kosteva a~d Rick Bandstra and others are getting from their public is that they're facing economic pressures and we don't care about public services as we're having such a difficult time making it in our own family situation. And that's very frustrating and I chuckle and mention a big pitch for tax credits, yqu know, a lot of people believe these are tax expenditures. ~hat it is really just another way of the state giving direct aid to the institutions, and its just going to drive the state budget further into debt and accelerate this social rewriting of the social contract. So I'm afraid that its going to be a tough time ahead until the public really resolves in their own minds the level of public services tnat they really want 9ut of the state government. J think the federal level has done a tremendous disservice to us in Michj..gan in that the publJ..o 46 �has gotten used to having their cake and eating it, too, and · just it on the credit card for the national debt. And so in the same paper you can read about Congress passing a tax reduction bill and at the same time talking about passing mandatory health care insurance for everybody and it'll just drive the ~ational deficit further and higher and . bighe~. Well, we don't have that liberty at the state level, -but the public thinks we do. So the public ia going to write to J~ Kosteva and say, "Gee, we w~nt money . for ·the arts an<1 we want a tax cut next week, too, while you're at it." And they'll~ totally inconsistent to them because that's exactly what their Congressmen are telling them that they f.re .going to deliver in the next election. They'r~ going to give them national health care insurance and they're going to cut their tax~s. So why can't we at the state level give money for the arts and c~t our taxes? Sounds reasonable to me and I'm going to write a letter to the legislators. Blews: We'll provide the legislators' addresses to you. Sederburg: Very good. Blews: Shifting to a national perspective, Ms. Gallagher. Gallagher: Well, first let me assure you that Michigan is not alone in having a confused approach to incentives. for charitable g~v~ng. I commend to all of you Virginia's sales tax exemption system which is one of the most complicated I have ever seen. But I'm disturbed by what I'm seeing around the country as I monitor tax challenges to nonprofits. And what I'm seeing goes back to what we were discussing in the first part of the session which is a fundamental lack of identity within the nonprofit sector. Blews: And now we're talking about tax challenges not tax incentives, an importan~ prid9e in the conversation here. ~ ...:::;: •:::fl • Gallagher: ~ ~~ell1 I've waited for a long time to do that. - ., - - - .. . - -. _ ---- I 9 1Je ~sr=ma-hri i* ~ •••~~~~~~;-1£Hiti? I mean a tax exemption- is an incentive. It's not 'an incentive to charitable giving but its an incentive to the charitable organization to carry out its purposes; similarly a sales tax exemption I would put generally within that framework. p~operty Blews: Good. Gallagher: Two weeks ago, I'm told, the tax assessor's office tor Lincoln, Nebraska, was out with tape measures measuring the square footage of every day care center in every church basement in Lincoln. The tax assessor was quoted in the newspaper as saying, "Child care is not charit~le unless its free. Further, child care is not a religious purpose, " Therefore, he apparently proposes to ~equire all churches in 47 T �Lincoln to pay a proportional share of the property tax on that portion of the building that's oevoted to child care. The Lincoln newspaper, I'm further tQld, wrote an editori4~ commending this fellow for his innovative ~nd creative approach to solving Lincoln's reven\le problems. I don't understand this, except to ~ay that peQple apparently don't,, .. aren't seeing the value in child care, the importance of chilq care, the need for quality child care to preserve f~ly structures. We haven't t~lked yet about your fourth sector, which I see as the family. The Alabama Legislature -- House of Delegates -- I'm told, 2 weeks ago repealed •. ,voted to repeal all its charitable sales tax exemptions a$ part of a restructuring, taking away what they viewed as unfair ta~ benefits. I believe that's going to be correct_e d in the Alabama Senate, but I'm seeing the need for state revenlle driving, and for local revenue, driving some decisions that I think are terribly unfortunate for the future of nonprofit _organizations. I'm seeing organizations forced to spend substantial amounts of money to defend existing tax exemptions, and I'm concerned about it. I'm also seeing on the government/business/private partnership area a fund~ental exclusion of service delivery agencies from some of the dialogue that's going on. I'm told there was a conference at Wing Spread maybe a month or 6 weeks ago, I'm pot sure, a~ which government, including the Governor's Council of State Policy Advisors and business leaders and foundation executives, sat down and talked about how to restructure delivery systems. I'm told that deliverers of social services were notable absent from that discussion. Another group that I work with is trying an experiment in Virginia to renegotiate the delivery system and when they went to talk to their state funders, they were told basically, "Go away. You do what we, tell you. We don't want to hear what you think." I'm not sure how to correct these identity problems. But I think that if we don't address them pretty quickly, we're going to have some serious problems over the next 10 years. Blews: Cunningham: Do we see those same kinds of identity problems producing s~ilar challenges in Michigan? Father Cunningham? Oh sure, but the not-for-profit organizations, the complete spectrum of even to the point of antithesis •.• and I remember when Focus Hope started, one of the things that bothered me tremendously was people calling us an agency. Because by definition, an agency is something that does what other people _tell-!hero to do. They act out of a contract to do ~om~thing. ( ...~;aieQ \Ui 1 1, aa•urs>; ~deyelpp· gifweri:ft"e·s te':r=*t1fM~ Clll!t~€1 \_ 'S.atP r WQ~!'[._!!Ei; eaeJP&ia•a ·- ~y a~e ~ i@ • 8 i S!.... '.!!!) That relationship, whi"le- -very important maybe-- to certain objectives, is the death knell of the not-for-profit, highly voluntary, and what I should think of as the •.. those of you who like Lake St. Clair and Jefferson Avenue •.• all know about 48 �- I the fish fly. He comes in '\:here and get~ under your car tires and we crunch up several million billton of them eve~ yea+, I always used to think, "That's a good ,idea for not-foJ;-profJrt organizations. They guide themselves as fi~h flies, They come get something done thep get out of business," And t}\en good people like Dr. Mawby come along and say, "Hey, wait a mipute. We'd like to help you, but how long ~re you going to be around? we're lookin<J for some · consJr~tency." Rignt, Ru~~? And we're looking •.. Mawby; Cunningham: Positively. '• So you need some institutional stuff . .And there's a struggle within an organization, both to be institutiopql and to be free. And let me tell you, that's a stiff one, That's wheJ;e that small group of not-for-profits that are not agenciee. And for that group now comes the responsibility t~ take this Jb.usiness community over here and this government community on the other side, who obviously have failed to do something or there wouldn't be a purpose for the not-for-profit, and then you go and say, "Its their fault, business, and its their fault, government, that they don't know how important we are to their destiny. " Well that's a crock. Its the responsibility of the not-for-profit organization to mak~ partnerships with government and with business and to draw them along and to make some very impQrtant assumptions. The business community has an ethic. Now they're crooks. There are also crooks in the not-for-profit. But they have an ethic, and that ethic ought to be honored and respected, but its an ethic, a kind of fence around their business practice~ out of which they hope to become really rich apd take care of themselves. And that's acknowledged, There's nothing wrong with that. And government, Eugene McCarthy made a good case and its government's business is to maintain the morays, not to establish morality, not to grab ideals. And after Thomas Jefferson and all that stuff God laid to rest, the purpose of government was to maintain the institution. The purpose of the not-for-profit organization is to reach for the stars , To · ~each for the moral possible in our time and then to integra~e that with the morays lifting them up inch by inch and with the business community making them a little better, too, for the common good. Now comes this not-for-profit organization, wi.mping and whining, "By God, this is hard work. " Well of course it is. That's what you chose to set that at the helm. -And you stand up to yourself and if you're the captain of the ship, you shouldn't receive any pay. "Why shouldn ' t you receive any pay as the captain? " (This will make me very popular.) "Why should not the captain of the ship receive any pay?" Because he is inviting in all these volunteers. Come follow me. And if he gets 7 5 grand a year, how can he ask all these volunteers to come in and do for nothing what he's managing for a pretty handsome salary. We got a lot of stuff 49 �I here we've got to look at. And, finally, on a very positive side, because I think we're in for some real great surprises and while, Jane, you make some good projections there, I'll bet you didn't even project what was going to happen in Europe a year and a half ago either see. So that's nice. General Motors has 5-year plans. Now, let's talk about projections, You know we have an aging population in this country that's pretty healthy, pretty healthy. And instead of those poor folks sitting down there in their condo around the sw~in9 pool discussing in Florida, or Boca Raton tg ~ap~ific, the latest and the m~st effe~tive laxatives..:.J'w~y 1 aft&. I !•~ th~ ·- ·- - - .. - -.. - - folks you've got to give back? When are we 9oing to start telling them, you've had a nice life ~~ time to give back? And to give back as a fine government ~epresentative. Yo~ don't have to go out from GM and now become a con$ultant anQ _make $500,000 a year. You've got enough to take care of you for a while. Come on, give back. I had a guy come in the other day and his wife finally said, convinced him last year, time to give back. I have a major doer. He's in at 7:30 every morning, setting the discipline for the entire organization because he's a good guy and wants to give back, and he figures at 65 he's got 10 years to give back. We have a tremendously developing population in this country of people who've been around the block a !ew . time~ho- are au~=atest _!:r~!is ure . c~~I!5! g ~~ back L J2att;, we ' •&a & \i~.., !ull!!fil&!&a j ) ~_@s!,t!!f=a.a•e ~··sa-! . , <?t a;...-athe~ a'~. Frankly, I thinx '"weve got to get busy asnol'lproffts and forgive our government •t re that's _whr · :55£·!iZ_~;~~!E~n~ an~u~~·!-ar b~aus,e we_'~er!S cr~tic~sm and I have no criticism of business. Good Lora, they're on their backs. But I certainly think we've got, if there's a partnership, it has to be their respect for the nonprofits and getting out there and standing at the helm in the storm. Blews: You strike upon an issue that Or. Payton points out in his paper that the voluntary tradition in this nation is, in fact, a tradition and, therefore, it must be passed on. That it is not ... Cunningham& -... You bet! ... Blews: ... simply enough to assume that it will exist, that it involves, as he says, the challenge to preserve and to practice and to understand, to study, to be faithful, to guard, and most importantly, to teach. And let's throw that issue open there. Are we teaching new generations that 50 �tradition, that value of volunteerism and nonprofit service? Mrs. Upjohn. Upjohn: Blews: You know, I ..• as I told you initially, I come from the volunteer community from station wagon driving, brownie baking, car pooling, bandage rolling, well baby clinic, yo~ name it. And my kids were with me while I was doing that. They knew that I spent the time that wh~le I wasn't with them and while they were safely in school, working in the community. Today, in so many families where its nec_essary for both parents to work, they may do volunteer service. They may have all kinds of board commitments and they may be involved, but their children don't know it. Their children have no idea ~hat they really are making a contribution or that, as they grow up, they need to give back. I think we have to have more youth United Ways. We have to have more involvement for children and young people that go beyond selling Girl Scout cookies but where chi~Qren ~eal!y ~nd~stand w~a~ !t~~ans to \ have !he jo¥. of givi~~ -~ liJ&Yla~·-~-!lu~por_t: ~:· P~o:_~~ - pil:=r:J - f our discussion now. And this panel did not nee ,ea there. We're talking about ~.at_ado we do now for the~~ureL Where do we go from here? How o we build on ~f -its worthy of being built on, this tradition of the nonprofit sector, how do we create a partnership that may or may not be a very good partnership At this point V§h¥ ~ffective or as lively a partnership as it ~hqylsL.be ·t.J ~w . C1'6 ('e go fiom h~·?- fia · !~~ee thes'!.~!'?'!'!!i!JI:\ · \ ~t ·IA\M~~ ~-e ~!~i;;s::el!r W+r~~ . •!a~~·· ~·~J l dY;de ~§~~~t.:\ And Dr. Sederburg, I can tell- you're anx~ous to ump in. o:,-A Sederburg: I am because I just came from a state of the school speech night at oyr local sahoo~~ the pitch of the {\ , superintendent waa. the ...... white P'!per and the ending value was a value on family and··-of community involvement. And I 1 ) just throw out as a beginning point of all this, I think that we need to get a further discussion of values, both in the school system and in government and in business as well. I think we, perhaps, have gone through a period of time when values haven't been talked about very clearly and have been sort of shied away from. And I think that's a strength of the nonprofit sector and is going to be critical from the schools to everything to have a clarity of values. So and on our local school districts, they set it up so the kids have to put in community service time in middle school and in high school, l~st 51 �I and I think that's a neat, neat thing to do. to the value system. And it goes back Mr. Cantrell. Cantrell: Just like what Betty had said here about taking the kids around and letting them see first hand the value and teach that value. One of the big concerns ·r ight now in volunteerism is, who is passing on those particular values to the kids now that the parents are not there to do them? Are day care centers, in fact, passing those on? Are the school systems, in fact, passing it on? One of the big problems I see today, one of the hopes I see for the future, is the fact that the schools are getting on board and they are starting to make community service a part of the school experience, but not the educational experience. And that's ... that's the problem that is out there right now. I know, in our community, kids are _going out and they're doing things and they're not able to come back and process what has happened. In their little mind, they're out there doing something and they are things happening that they don't quite understand and if you don't process that, it doesn't become a value. Experience in itself is not a value. The value has to be passed on. I call upon the school system to start to teach that value, but also to take part in that educational process, that as an individual, and adult individual or a child in this community, not only do you take from it, you give back to it. And what is the value of giving that back to? The whole idea of social insurance that started volunteer ism in this country, the whole bond raising type of mentality is saying that, "There but by the grace of God go I." And, "I'm one paycheck away from being homeless." And the social insurance approach to that is to say, "I will go out and help those people because one day 1 when its my turn to receive help, someone will be there for me. " And until we start to instill that value .•. Right now we're turning kids off. Okay? These kids are going out and getting these experiences and not being processed. And not only that but the agencies 1 sometimes, are having them do t]lings that a 12-year-old can't do much let's have them vacuum. I'm sorry but there's not a lot of value that can be gotten out of that unless you explain to that kid what the overall agency purpose is and how vacuuming may be helping them meet that goal in some way. But that experience has to be related to the kids, and right now we're having them to do ~ommunity service and they're not learning from it and a lot of them are being turned off and I don't want it to be like the first speech I ever did when I got into this field was to a bunch of vets, and I said to them, "Volunteer ism." Uhhhhhhhhh. Every time I said "Volunteerism". Urrrrrrrr. And after it was over, I went up to the guy and I said, "God, you know, what did I do wrong?" He said, "These are all World War II vets. They learned the concept of volunteerism as, "I 52 �I I need 3 volunteers -- you, you and you -- and they didn't come back." Okay? So I learned right away that in certain circles you use other words than volunteerism. Are we doing the same thing with our kids now? Is the question. Are we saying to them when they hear the word volunteerism out of adults because of their experience in 9th grade or Kindergarten, are they going to say, "Oh, no. Mr. Cantrell, don't come here with that." And that's what we need to take a look at. We need to process it. We need to start to institutionalize it, We need to pass on that value that now both working parents cannot pass on. And we need to start it in Kindergarten and take it all the way through the educational experience. Blews: Our audience ... Ce1ntrell: Please ... Slews: ... is anxious to jump in with us. Bolhouse: I I Yes, please. Thank you. Susan Bolhouse. I'm on the Board of Education of Waverly Community Schools and also the aoard of Directors of the ~ichigan Association of $ChQol ~Qgr s w is represented in ou · . , wa ~ t e bit sorry a e ucati~o-fZ", wa~rep;elen ed 011. ·s p 1. d I w&l very _r,l:'ea d~haMis G~Yagher 'ted m, io ch A.d~ n ai}P' edu ati . Tll point, up until '"looil_..., ut ag I as '9ettin ~te frustrated because this ~~•nt chi and education seemed to have been o r ed. e ~eve t a al~r-y~uf !ij n 1.es, a o organ1.zat~o s do represent children, that you do have them, you do work with them. Their good is at hand and in your hearts. But you send them to us, the schools, school boards and associations, to take care of. Jim Epolito is inherent in ~ at the moment, But he said priorities. In continuing this discussion, I would like you to remember thot / . children need to be a priority, that when it comes to sett1ng money aside, robbing Peter to pay Paul, when you do tQke money away from one agency, somehow please try to ~eep in ~nd that tpe children, you've heard it before but it has never been truer than today with budget cuts, children are our futu~e. And, yes, ~chools do need to teach volunteerism at home as part of the curriculum whether its a graduation requirement or not. As a School Board member, I feel that I pretty much cover all 3 eectors as Or. Payton pointed out. But as a -fourth sector, yes, indeed, its family, but as ~ fourtn sector, you can also take people such as myself who do work through an elective process -- I'm elected, I'm government, Business, in essence, running a school district is busines~. And then, as a volunteer, because $20 a month for 30 hours a week of work doesn't really cut it. I mean, baby sitters, no thank you. But please I'~ here to urge you, in finali~ing this discussion, please do not take your eyes off the G J 53 \ ~ I �I I children. If you can't continue in building your Nonprofit Forum to include children in getting involvement and interest in business partnerships, please do. And as a representative of the Michigan Association of School Boards, I know that we have many, many school board members out there that we represent who would love to walk hand in hand with you on the local level and on the state level to bring these children, to educate them, to give them the jobs that they need and that you want to give them. Let us help you. Thank you. Blews: d be assured the Summit here is a representatio o var..L leadership and~f course,. . one deal~wit th reality of edulin~ , ...... b sured that t Fo n its / repr senta on oe~ave ery ery thoro rep · ~tation of the -12 ducat nal c uni , he c nit lege ~1 of edu at· n ap.d the · gher e ucat~ n lev , bot "'PUI>llc and pri ~·~d o oint is ertainly 1 taken and we would want t offer the assurance that e children are not being for ten and are recognized as ~e of tbe prio · · with the nonprofit sector. or:- Mawby?- - - -· _ ___ _ _. Mawby: - -- - - -· - I think, as we think of the future, Father Bill spoke • eloquently to the potential of the seniors in society giving 1 back. I think that's something we need to recognize and capitalize on and some exciting things are happening of that sort. The other end of the age spectrum is what we're talking 1 about here and I think that's equally important. Part of its 1 putting it into the academic world, for example, usually talks about 2 sectors. They talk about the for-profit business sector and they talk about the public, tax supported sector, and the rest is invisible. So to consciously put in to the sequence from pre-K-12 all the way through in Social Studies, in History, in Economics, and all aspects of life, thi§ sector would be useful. But I think one of the most e~citing opportunities, you know one of the realities of the contemporary society is that we have prolonged adolescence for most young people into their mid-20's. They have far more capacity and more motivation to be contributing, we as I guess do-gooders, say well, they're the beneficiaries of so many things. We give them so few opportunities to assume responsibility and to exercise responsibility. And one of the great ways ... I'm not sure I'd like compulsory volunteerism ..• I I ????: ... That's an oxymoron .•. Mawby: ... really, but required for graduation, I'm not sure about that one. But I am sure that young people, and it goes before the teenage years, are anxious to contribute, not always to be the beneficiaries; and that requires real creativity. One of the greatest challenges is to the ~chool system itself, because usually they don't let the students participate and contribute. They're the recipients and the beneficiaries. So 54 �/ it requires creativity and the life in the community. Schools are an important part of that. But more hours are spent out of school than in school in the life of every kid, so that requires churches and all of the nonprofits, the community at large, to be more creative in involving young people. And we haven't said a great deal about the churches today. Sister Monica, would you like to help us with that very important part of the nonprofit sector? Kostielney: Well, I think there re q-~ew things that have been mentioned tha are fairl p f u9d f we recogni e the whole order of wha is goi on n ?cie y. I thi th dramatic economic cha es tha are c u ring I think t!J.e shi t · ~digmp for how we re ch c nsJri'~us nd I think the ack of\ a moral cons nsus n so , 'i et;v"li . . . hose are 1a11 fac rs that B e upon hur 's ers ~1i ve;, wha I belli eve is la king · ~oc iety that thi ches an eally fprovide lo us f r a d that is r~flec io efore l cti n. / I thin the re s many chang s th ire occu' rin tl}at we ne d to dersta d and think' thro 9fand ques ion a~d push u a lit e bit n the edge. And at's neede for hat is a rofou eflect on on the r alit s that are pari ~ on our ives nd thi that · leads us, hen, to ques · o i~ new w s wh is appen these 3 s ctors. I th ri~ ha\ driv s .•. w at dries e the •. e of the secto s) for~xam e, i governm nt other ~ ors are kind f ~n by th ir own re our by~ an we do? I an, go ernment asked the e tion, "What c we do with o •.• with these I think asks the same hing in ~erm I they're driveh___ y technology, they're ' driven bX their own 1 tT 55 ' ' �I I Blews: •• W~~ the point of starting now to move toward the conclus · and I know that there are at least a couple _of-pe1)ple who have very compelling remarks that they're anxious to get onto the record. I think there was somebody from the audience who'd like to comment. ~oard Rosenbaum: Yes. My name is Rene Rosenbaum. I'm a Research Associate with the Julian Samora Research Institute at Michigan State University. And I have a question that I hope will touch on the relationship between cooperation between government, business and the nonprofit sector, and also I think will touch on the issue of public policy. The question is this: I've seen the role of nonprofit organizations as promoters of volunteerism and democracy. In direct contradiction, we've seen the role of nonprofit organizations, for the most part, as helping maintain national ... a national safety net. It seems to me that seeing nonprofit organizations as promoters of volunteer ism and coopera ... and democracy implies less government and less business assistance and funding, while seeing nonprofit organizations as maintaining a national safety net requires more government and more business funding. If people from the panel could respond to that please. Blews: Quite a question. Cantrell: I don't know if this is the response. Former Governor George Romney has said in many instances that he has every confidence in the American people because there are more people than problems, and all we have to do is empower the people to deal with the problems. I think that when you take a look at human service agencies, you are looking at both of those aspects and we can't ... we can't escape those. In one sense, and we are all aware in human services of the ebb and flow of monies, okay, and what happens and you see this typical process time and time again. When there's a lot of money there, the professionals rush in. We fill ourselves and all of our offices with professionals and then the money ru~hes out and Mr. Cantrell? 56 ~ I �we run out and get volunteers from schools like people like yourself, as student interns, and they fill those s~e offices. One of the things that happens, though, i& •.. the people, the volunteer managers, will go about filling those offices. The administrators will run out and start screaming and hollering about the money that is not there any more. 1 think one of the things we're going to always need that, We're going to always need ~overnment and business monies and support to maintain that safety net, but at the same time we're maintaining a second safety net and that is that whole pioneer spirit. I know when I was in ... in •... in •• , grade school I said things like, "That good old American know-how, Yankee ingenuity." I never knew what it meant, but I was American and wow, I got this somehow and it gave me ~onfidence to go out and do things because, wow, somehow because I happened to be born here, I have something special. Okay? I don't see that specialness there any more. Okay? In terms of _the volunteers. In terms of administrators, I see them looking only in one direction, that is towards funding, and so goes the funding, so goes our operations and our agencies. And what we need to have is we need to have a marriage of those two and both of have to be seen as equally ••• equal partners in that whole relationship. Volunteers, except for the Board of Directors who are treated quite well with dinners and everything else, but your direct service ~~u~t~~~~~~ treated like tbird-cl · · times. . n 'ferms of that we'l neve cape t at, I think that its necessary, but we're mai t ining 2 thin here. We're maintaining that safet~et fo people\ who eed it, we e also ~· ntai~· ng a volu e~r spi · t th 1lt if we every los it in t is cou ry, eve hing will umb e ~ ght along with it. An we're no puttip any emphasiS'\P th,·t volunteer spir~ at a to the s an~6ynt that we need . o. , I go up to Weste and I talk to pr~~eors up there and ·~· :1e11 them, "It is impo i~e for any ~e .fo graduate from yo r n~iversity and not serv on a board or be volunteer. It s · 'im~ossible fo anyone tq~e an ~U'cator I ~ a social wor~ey or \ hospita administiato~ ang not i~porporate volunte,1s. An~ yet yo don't t~ach t~~/concept fO them.t : When go RUt, they~ow ho to manage peop~ that a~e paid, ~ ~ut they h~~e not ide how manage7that /seco~ele~ent, and :soak at ~~e a~encies. Rig t now 'dar every pa pf.rson in an ' encyl theJ:"e are at lea t 50, m nimally 50, u id people. dYE}' we only take a lo k at h to manage tho ... that small per~ntage, instead of o vastly empower and manage that other pa~ ~m~-rdo---· know i ·- __ li-~e~~~tb~""''l~e~e~e:<.:: Blews: Mr. Yamanishi. Yamanishi: Nonprofit organizations began with the concept of charity. Father Cunningham subscribes to the idea of giving without any 57 �I Blews: Mr. Bianco. Bianco: Firet of all, responding to the question from the audi$nce, it seems to me that the safety net provided by the nonprofit sector has its limits. It seems to me that when you begin to talk a.b out whatever the number is these days, 35 million without any health care insurance, and you begin to talk about bridges collapsing and roads falling apart, its very hard for me to really see that no matter how creative we get or how many volunteers we get, its very hard for m~ to see issues like that being fully, fully addressed simply within the thi~d sector without substantial financial resources. And I'm sure there are others around the room that can think of other issues like that where the safety net issue, in my opinion, cannot, in the short term -- short term in this case being defined as the next 5 to 10 years as I see the short term ·~ be provided by the ... by the ... by the third sector. So the i~sue then becomes, is it governmental resources or is it no resources? Is the problem simply going to be tolerated as it is tolerated, as you well know, in many other countries of this world, and some who do have economic resources. And I think that would be totally contradictory to the spirit we've talked about here today that's embodied, we hope, in the American conscience, of caring a whole lot about their neighbor and not wanting to see suffering and so forth. So ... so clearly we've got those kind of issues that I don't think are going to be fully handled by the third sector. Now, 27 years ago, when my wife and I got married, we came back to Michigan and we went to a church retreat the first month we were back. And it turned out that the individual giving the retreat is now sitting down the table there. And our lives 58 ' I �,- - I I I I I IUews: were never the same after we got through with Father Bill Cunningham's weekend retreat. And he'e still on my case as you can see. But I'm not going to let him go. I think one ot the challenges that the nonprofit also has is a credibility challenge, and its not just what Father Bill says about all of us working for free which may work for him -- God takes care of him, you know -- Kroger sort of takes care of us and GQQ helps out sometimes. But I think one of the challenges that all of us have is the credibility of our third sector QI; nonprofit organizations. I' 11 n~veJ; forget when I was considering leaving Dayton/Hudson Corporation and I talked to several people and I said, "Gee, sho~ld - I really do this? Does this make sense to you?" Several people, basically business and professional people, said, "Oh, Qed, ~oe. Don't go out to that Detroit Institute of Arts. Don 1 t go to work in a nonprofit organization. You 1 re going to lose all your management skills. You're going to get caught in the most _God-awful politics and nonproductive activity that you've ever seen in your life. Just stay away. Don't do it." I would assert that if you talked to most business executives, and although Peter Drucker's certainly helping us all out a great deal these days in his nice articles, but I suspect if you talked to most business executives, they would assume that people who work in nonprofit organizations may have great spiritual qualities, may have great caring qualities, but I suspect at least their mind set would be that most of us are not very good managers. So I think the credibility issue for us is how do we forcefully demonstrate financial integrity, management strength, as third sector people, to get the respect of people like Representative Bandetra and Representative Kosteva and other people who, even in the governmental sector, will have that question and that accountability. So I think we've got a lot of work to clo , there to demonstrate our management competence and ou~ financial capabilities and I don't mean fund raising, I mean accountability. Never losing sight, of course, of what Father Cunningham and Sister Monica and others have said, that we, in the process of doing that have a balance in our organizations s9 we never lose sight of the caring mission and the eoaring~ to the stars, as Father Bill said. But as we soar to the stars, we should have our audit in our pocket and we shoul~V · -~ have a good, tight organization. ~~JYJ With that, discussion. Dr. Payton, you helped t~~~s Can you help us to come to~conclusion~ whole Well, I'm a ... any of you ever heard ot--Meye 's break personality type indicators, I'm an ENPP and I don't like to come to closure on these things. I don't believe in closure on open-ended, problematic questions of the kind we're talking about. In fact, I think its a real mistake to think that there's an answer to the question .. , questions we've been 59 \ �I I trying to talk over. I said in the paper, and listening to all of you this morning, I'm persuaded that to restate what I said in the paper, mission is the key. But my understanding of that has been expanded and, I think, enlightened by some of the things that I've heard here. As you recall, my opening remarks I mentioned what somebody called the "U.S.S.Were" -- Russia -- the society facing problems that, I think, make our's appear to be ... make our concerns appear to be self-indulgent. Very, very grave problems. Bill Sederburg captured, in a sense, what •.• what I think they face and that I think we face . when we start with the notion of mission and we think about mission in the larger sense. When he used the phrase, rewriting the social contract, that kind of language is being used more widely all the time these days. heard that, the efforts to same_ ls of other when ibl.e und t �And we can't just think about the third sector. We have to do it in the context of all 3. If we're an American democracy anything remotely like the one that we've all known _and loved, then we will continue to be a 3 sector society. So we've got to call business to task in examining its place in this 3 sector society as well as government, as well as the sector that we've been trying to focus on here today ~ e o e as r a-t lve our on, on th -.. ~n --bpportunity . ...,.. -- --· -- The next 20 years, I am told, will see the largest transfer of wealth from one generation to another, not only in the history of this country but probably in the history of the world. Estimated numbers don't sound authentic in the mouth of a humanist like myself, estimates ranging from $3 to $7 trillion dollars. So although we've got lots of economic problems, don't you believe that we are not a weal thy society, that there isn't money to do things. That's not our problem. But it is a very serious question of what those resources will be used for and I think that's part of what will come .out of our participation in this rewriting of the social contract. alews: In that spirit, not of closure but and not of an ending but of really of a beginning, I'd like to suggest that the panel t~ke a vote here, and since there are several Legislators here, ~his seems an appropriate thing to do, how many of you would be in favor of continuing this kind of summit and this kind of dialogue into the future? All in favor say "Aye." All: "Aye" Slews: · Opposed? I think that speaks rather emphatically to our commitment today to really a new beginning and a new partnership. We do, on behalf of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum, want to express a very, very special thank you to each of the panelists, each of you leaders from business, from government, from the nonprofit sector, for the very, very thoughtful contributions that you have made to the dialogue here. We talked about partnerships, and it simply should be 61 .. .. �r noted here that a commitment to partnership is refl~cted in the presence by each of these individuals here today, They co~ld have been many other places • There weJ;e many other demands on their calendars. They made a personal commitment, In a sense, they and their organiz(;ltions made a fiscol COllUllitment by committing the resource, the value of their t~e, to be here with us. And so we do want to thank each of you for your commitment to this beginning partnership. we hope that those of you who have listened in and looked in have found this to be a stimulating discussion, have found it to be a thoughtful discussion, and we hope that in your organizations and in your activitiee ~round this state and throughout our society, that this will also lead you to n~w challenges and to new opportunities fo~ partnership. ·- - - - Lewis; re ls pp op ypu / ha ·' Thank (End of Summit-- 12:34 p.m.) 62 -- -- -- -----1 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Minutes-Master-Copy Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit minutes-master copy Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit minutes-master copy. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49722 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/25d17c9a6fb1bf900881b191b408c49e.pdf ee0489327fb23d3f759eb8946a6d0450 PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An ailianct to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. MNF Summit - February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" Convener Ms. Maryellen J. Lewis Executive Director Michigan Nonprofit Forum Moderator Dr. Edward O. Blews, Jr. President Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan Speaker Dr. Robert L. Payton Director Center on Philanthropy, Indiana University Panel Members Mr. N. Charles Anderson President Detroit Urban League Mr. Joseph P. Bianco, Jr. Executive V.P., Founders Society Detroit Institute of Arts Hon. Richard Bandstra State Representative MI House of Representatives Dr. Jane Deanne Clark Senior Director Michigan Health Care Institute Michigan Hospital Association Mr. Anthony Benavides Third Ward Councilmember City of Lansing Mr. Edward L. Cox President and Chief Financial Officer Accident Fund of Michigan �Fr. William Cunningham Executive Director Focus: HOPE Mr. James Epolito Chief Executive Officer Blue Care Network/Health Central Ms. Jaime G. Gallagher Counsel Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg Mr. Robert E. Ivory President United Way of Michigan Hon. James A. Kosteva State Representative MI House of Representatives Sr. Monica Kostielney Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference Dr. Russell G. Mawby Chairman and CEO W.K. Kellogg Foundation Mr. Lawrence Roehrig Secretary/Treasurer AFSCME, Council 25 AFL-CIO Dr. William A. Sederburg V.P. for Public Policy and Director Public Sector Consultants Ms. Elizabeth Upjohn Board Member Kalamazoo Foundation Hon. Jackie Vaughn in State Senator Michigan State Senate Dr. Mark I. Wilson Director Nonprofit Michigan Project, MSU Ms. Lois Work Vice President New Detroit Mr. Herbert Yamanishi Executive Director MI Community Action Agency Assoc. Ms. Judith Miller Michigan Business Ombudsman Michigan Department of Commerce rcf: 02/27/92, summpanl. Is t\pro grams vsummit\6400\mjt �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan, MNF Summit - February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan *s Government and Business Community " Audience Members Mr . James Barrett President Michigan State Chamber of Commerce Dr. Christopher M. Clark Professor of Education Michigan State University Ms. Susan Bolhouse Vice President Waverly Board of Education Ms. Donna M. Clarke Administrative Assistant Michigan Nonprofit Forum Mr. Paul Booden Director Michigan Health Occupations Dr. Kenneth E. Corey Dean, College of Science Michigan State University Ms. Betty Boone Interim Director MI Council for Arts & Cultural Affairs Mr. William Dansby Executive Vice President Michigan Optometric Association Judge Thomas E. Brennan President Thomas M. Cooley Law School Mr. Arthur Dudley President Greater Lansing Urban League Mr. Aaron Cantrell Executive Director Voluntary Action Cntr/Gr. Kalamazoo V.P., Volunteer Centers of Michigan Mr. David O. Egner Executive Assistant to the Chairman W.K. Kellogg Foundation �Mr. David Fukuzawa Program Director The Skillman Foundation Ms. Sharon Parks Senior Research Associate Michigan League for Human Services Ms. Barbara K. Goldman Office of Ombudsman Department of Commerce Mr. W. Calvin Patterson Executive Director McGregor Fund Mr. James Helmrich Public Relations Director Michigan Bell Telephone Company Ms. Linda Patterson Administrative Director Council of Michigan Foundations Mr. Frederick H. Hoffecker Assistant Attorney General State of Ml/Charitable Trust Division Ms. Helen C. Philpott Chairman Community Foundation of Greater Flint Mr. Steven L. Johns-Boehme Executive Coordinator Michigan Ecumenical Forum Ms. Judith A. Rapanos Chairman MI Council for Arts & Cultural Affairs Ms. Dorothy A. Johnson President Council of Michigan Foundations Dr. Rene Rosenbaum Research Associate Julian Samora Research Institute Mr. Glenn F. Kossick Executive Director Metro Health Foundation Mr. Glenn R. Stevens Executive Director Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan Dr. Judith Lanier President Partnership for New Education Mr. Forrest Lewis CPA Plante & Moran Mr. Robert S. Lewis Consultant Lewis Associates Ms. Frances Parker President League of Women Voters of Michigan Mrs. Maryann Tillson Administrative Secretary Michigan Nonprofit Forum Mr. Thomas Turner Secretary/Treasurer Michigan AFL-CIO Rev. Leonard M. Young Michigan Region President RLDS Church rcf:02/27/92, fummaudi. l«\progniu\suinmit\6400Vmjt �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving^ volunteering and a strong^ effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. SUMMIT FEEDBACK Please take a few moments at the conclusion of the summit to answer the following questions. Your thoughts are important to us. You will help us in our assessment of this session and provide some direction for future summits. Please leave this form on your chair. 1. What was most valuable to you in today's summit? 2. Was this a useful format for addressing the issue? What changes in the format, if any, would you suggest? 3. What would you suggest as important nonprofit-related issues for consideration at a future summit? 4. Who are other Michigan leaders we should invite to future summits? Please indicate both name and organization. �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An affiance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. MNF Summit - February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship 'with Michigan's Government and Business Community " NOTES: ��MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 Ail alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. Maryellen J. Lewis, Executive Director EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Michigan Nonprofit Forum is a statewide alliance to prqmote the awareness and effectiveness of Michigan's nonprofit sector, and to advance the cause of voluntarism and philanthropy in the state. Background. In response to challenges facing the nation's nonprofit sector, volunteer leaders and executives often statewide organizations concerned with voluntarism and philanthropy in Michigan met on August 31, 1988 to form the Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Initially designed to convene members for joint discussions about shared issues, the Forum has evolved into an entity charged with achieving a new awareness and increased capacity of Michigan s nonprofit sector, and with interfacing funders, nonprofits and the public (working together with existing efforts in the state) to promote voluntarism and philanthropy in Michigan. To achieve these goals, the Forum does not itself serve as a field-specific trade association, competing for memberships and support with existing associations in Michigan. Instead, the Michigan Nonprofit Forum creates, for the first time, a statewide mechanism for dialogue, planning and cooperative action among all stakeholders in the nonprofit sector. The Forum brings together local and statewide leaders of nonprofit organizations, as well as public and private funders and tax-supported institutions (such as the public schools and universities) that also have an increasingly-recognized stake. The activities of the Forum address voluntarism, philanthropy and the nonprofit sector not as proprietary interests but aspubiic gopds. which broadly affect the state's economy, polity and quality of life, and which therefore merit careful analysis and planning, human resource development, informed public discussion, and dependable investment. �MNF Board of Trustees The Forum's Board of Trustees serves as the governing body. Although it is not intended to represent all stakeholders — an impossible task ~ it does bring together a small number of statewide organizations and their elected member representatives, to achieve a broad reach into many fields. Organizational Members Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan Council of Michigan Foundations Council of Michigan Urban Leagues Jewish Community Council Michigan Association of School Administrators Michigan Association of School Boards Congress of National Black Churches/Michigan Affiliate* Michigan Catholic Conference Michigan Community Action Agency Association Michigan Community College Association Michigan Council for Arts and Cultural Affairs Michigan Ecumenical Forum Michigan Health Council Michigan League for Human Services Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan United Way of Michigan At Large Members Richard H. Austin, Michigan Secretary of State John S. Lore, National Vice Chair, National Society of Fund Raising Executives Russell G. Mawby, CEO and Chairman, W.K. Kellogg Foundation George W. Romney, Chairman. The National Volunteer Center, and Former Governor of Michigan Elizabeth S. Upjohn, Vice Chairman, Kalamazoo Foundation "Invited, still in formation re f: exec s u mm. doc, adm /oth r, 0000 �MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan, Guiding Principles of the Michigan Nonprofit Forum Adopted by the Board of Trustees October 28,1991 A. The future of Michigan's economic well-being and quality of life depends on the commitment of its citizens and future citizens to the values of the nonprofit sector. Therefore it is in the best interest of the sector and the state to actively encourage voluntary giving and service. B. The service of the nonprofit sector to the public depends on an interactive partnership between service providers, funders, policy makers and the public. The Michigan nonprofit community should promote constructive dialogue among all these parties. C. In order to assist in re-educating the public and public leaders with concrete evidence of the PUBLIC BENEFIT of the nonprofit sector, the Michigan nonprofit community should encourage and undertake studies of its many unique benefits provided to the community at large. D. Michigan's nonprofit sector should define and aspire to the highest management standards of ethics, efficiency, and accountability, while preserving its historic and essential independence. E. The Michigan nonprofit community should develop and advance the philosophy of tax exemption, as well as positive public policies and incentives, to promote the vitality of the sector; and then play an active role in encouraging Michigan's leadership — including elected officials — to embrace it. F. The Michigan nonprofit sector should take an active role in shaping statewide regulations and rulings that define clear, consistent interpretations and applications for purposes of tax exemption. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Packet Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit packet Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit packet. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49723 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1a2e965e45fc939a7e8169e53ad4c879.pdf 88c852ab4a6c32e5e4e23e28f87011ce PDF Text Text MICHIGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 An alliance to promote giving, volunteering and a strong, effective nonprofit sector in Michigan. MNF Summit - February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan fs Government and Business Community " Convener Ms. Maryellen J. Lewis Executive Director Michigan Nonprofit Forum Moderator Dr. Edward O. Blews, Jr. President Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan Speaker Dr. Robert L. Payton Director Center on Philanthropy, Indiana University Panel Members Mr. N. Charles Anderson President Detroit Urban League Mr. Joseph P. Bianco, Jr. Executive V.P., Founders Society Detroit Institute of Arts Hon. Richard Bandstra State Representative MI House of Representatives Mr. Aaron Cantrell Vice Chair/Voluntary Action Ctrs of MI Executive Director Voluntary Action Center of Kalamazoo Mr. Anthony Benavides Third Ward Councilmember City of Lansing Dr. Jane Deane Clark Senior Director Michigan Health Care Institute Michigan Hospital Association �Mr. Edward L. Cox President and Chief Financial Officer Accident Fund of Michigan Fr. William Cunningham Executive Director Focus: HOPE Mr. James Epolito Chief Executive Officer Blue Care Network/Health Central Ms. Janne G. Gallagher Counsel Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg Mr. Frederick H. Hoffecker Assistant Attorney General State of Ml/Charitable Trust Division Mr. Robert E. Ivory President United Way of Michigan Hon. James A. Kosteva State Representative MI House of Representatives Mr. Lawrence Roehrig Secretary/Treasurer AFSCME, Council 25 AFL-CIO Dr. William A. Sederburg V.P. for Public Policy and Director Public Sector Consultants Ms. Elizabeth Upjohn Board Member Kalamazoo Foundation Hon. Jackie Vaughn HI State Senator Michigan State Senate Dr, Mark I. Wilson Director Nonprofit Michigan Project, MSU Ms. Lois Work Vice President New Detroit Mr. Herbert Yamanishi Executive Director MI Community Action Agency Assoc. Sr. Monica Kostielney Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference Dr. Russell G. Mawby Chairman and CEO W.K. Kellogg Foundation Ms. Judith Miller Michigan Business Ombudsman Michigan Department of Commerce rcf:02/27/92, summpanl. lst\programs\ ummit\6400\mjt � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Panel-Members-Draft Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit panel members draft Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit panel members draft. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49724 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/03d5ced366e093a6b46d810d05e2a310.pdf b8b15258cf2e7c4bb101ac06794f70a9 PDF Text Text '---+~ ~ MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MIClllGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 MNF Summit- February 28. 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" Convener Ms. Maryellen I. Lewis Executive Director Michigan Nonprofit Forum Moderator Dr. Edward 0. Blews, Jr. President Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan Speaker Dr. Robert L. Payton Director Center on Philanthropy, Indiana University Panel Members Mr. N. Charles Anderson President Detroit Urban League Mr. Joseph P. Bianco, Jr. Executive V .P., Founders Society Detroit Institute of Arts Hon. Richard Bandstra State Representative MI House of Representatives Mr. Aaron Cantrell Vice Chair/Voluntary Action Ctrs of MI Executive Director Voluntary Action Center of Kalamazoo Mr. Anthony Benavides Third Ward Councilmember City of Lansing Dr. Jane Deane Clark Senior Director Michigan Health Care Institute Michigan Hospital Association �---- --- ------------------------- Mr. Edward L. Cox Mr. Lawrence Roehrig President and Chief Financial Officer Accident Fund of Michigan Secretary/Treasurer AFSCME, Council 25 AFL-CIO Fr. William Cunningham Executive Director Focus: HOPE Dr. William A. Sederburg V.P. for Public Policy and Director Public Sector Consultants Mr. James Epolito Chief Executive Officer Blue Care Network/Health Central Ms. Janne G. Gallagher Counsel Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg Ms. Elizabeth Upjohn Board Member Kalamazoo Foundation Ron. Jackie Vaughn ill State Senator Michigan State Senate Mr. Frederick H. Hoffecker Assistant Attorney General State of MilCharitable Trust Division Dr. Mark I. Wilson Director Nonprofit Michigan Project, MSU Mr. Robert E. Ivory President United Way of Michigan Ron. James A. Kosteva State Representative MI House of Representatives Ms. Lois Work Vice President New Detroit Mr. Herbert Y amanishi Executive Director MI Community Action Agency Assoc. Sr. Monica Kostielney Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference Dr. Russell G. Mawby Chairman and CEO W .K. Kellogg Foundation Ms. Judith Miller Michigan Business Ombudsman Michigan Department of Commerce ref:f12/27192,aummpanl.lat\prograrna\all1D1Ili1\6400\mjt �MICIDGAN NONPROFIT FORUM 34 KELLOGG CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1022 Phone: 517/353-5038 Fax: 517/336-1327 MNF Summit- February 28, 1992 "Partnerships for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" Convener Ms. Maryellen J. Lewis Executive Director Michigan Nonprofit Forum Moderator Dr. Edward 0. Blews, Jr. President Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan Speaker Dr. Robert L. Payton Director Center on Philanthropy, Indiana University Panel Members Mr. N. Charles Anderson President Detroit Urban League Mr. Joseph P. Bianco, Jr. Executive V.P., Founders Society Detroit Institute of Arts Hon. Richard Bandstra State Representative MI House of Representatives Mr. Aaron Cantrell Vice Chair/Voluntary Action Ctrs of MI Executive Director Voluntary Action Center of Kalamazoo Mr. Anthony Benavides Third Ward Councilmember City of Lansing Dr. Jane Deane Clark Senior Director Michigan Health Care Institute Michigan Hospital Association �Mr. Edward L. Cox President and Chief Financial Officer Accident Fund of Michigan Fr. William Cunningham Executive Director Focus: HOPE Mr. James Epolito Chief Executive Officer Blue Care Network/Health Central Ms. Janne G. Gallagher Counsel Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg Mr. Lawrence Roehrig Secretaryrrreasurer AFSCME, Council 25 AFL-CIO Dr. William A. Sederburg V .P. for Public Policy and Director Public Sector Consultants Ms. Elizabeth Upjohn Board Member Kalamazoo Foundation Hon. Jackie Vaughn Ill State Senator Michigan State Senate Mr. Frederick H. Hoffecker Assistant Attorney General State of MilCharitable Trust Division Mr. Robert E. Ivory President United Way of Michigan Hon. James A. Kosteva State Representative MI House of Representatives Dr. Mark I. Wilson Director Nonprofit Michigan Project, MSU Ms. Lois Work Vice President New Detroit Mr. Herbert Y amanishi Executive Director MI Community Action Agency Assoc. Sr. Monica Kostielney Executive Vice President Michigan Catholic Conference Dr. Russell G. Mawby Chairman and CEO W .K. Kellogg Foundation Ms. Judith Miller Michigan Business Ombudsman Michigan Department of Commerce rcf:02/27/92,aummpanl.lat\programa\aummit\6400\mjt � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Panel-Members-Final-Version Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit panel members final version Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit panel members final version. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49725 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a4d52ebd375fea7d68ac110f28ea457c.pdf 1daf341ea6dcc874a71a6a352db21b08 PDF Text Text MR. YAMANISHI ^^^ DR. SEDERBURG MR. ANDERSON MR. IVORY \/C>l - MAWBY . BANDSTRA MS. GALLAGHER OSTl£A_M£V MR. COX CUNNINGHAM CtA SEN. VAUGHN R. WILSON MR. ROEHRIG DR. CLARK . KOSTEVA MR. EPOLITO CO»W MR. BIANCO MS. MILLER 6A M T AS. L L_ ^—) DR. PAYTON _ BLEWS . &^M AV/ 1 D<£, S �MR. YAMANISHI MR. ANDERSON MR. IVORY DR. DR. REP. 0 MS. GALLAGHER MRS. UPJOHN M^y MR. cox SEN. VAUGHN FR. CUNNINGHAM cOMJ\fflLA&MR. ROEHRIG DR. WILSON DR. CLARK OJX-AA C MS. WORK REP. KOSTEVA MR. EPOLITO MS. MILLER MR. BIANCO Me. DR. PAYTON DR. BLEWS M£. U& �MR. YAMANISHI MR. ANDERSON DR. SEDERBURG MR. IVORY DR. MAWBY REP. BANDSTRA MRS. UPJOHN S&. MS. GALLAGHER MR. COX FR. CUNNINGHAM SEN. VAUGHN DR. WILSON MR. ROEHRIG DR. CLARK MS. WORK REP. KOSTEVA MR. EPOLITO MS. MILLER MR. BIANCO DR. PAYTON DR. BLEWS � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Panel-Members-Seating-Chart Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit panel members seating chart Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit panel members seating chart. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49726 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/02d1723bcca43f48e100af55e4fdd8fa.pdf f597fee50ffe0f8c2d88c27dd57106fd PDF Text Text "Partnership for People and Progress: The Nonprofit Sector's Evolving Relationship with Michigan's Government and Business Community" (Video Floor Plan) Camera 0 Door Moderator Panel Camera Panel 0 Panel 0/A Mic Door 0/A Mic 0 " 0 0 Camera Camera Audience I Doorl I Door) Vjdeo Dtrector � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_Summit_1992-02-28_Video-Floor-Plan Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit video floor plan Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1992-02-28 summit video floor plan. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49727 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-02-28 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4bd9c725177f6b8c66d0ffa3b2deac31.pdf 2b0f3f826b50df976368fdd3aad65eea PDF Text Text Michigan Nonprofit Forum Classified Connection Appears in Crain's Nonprofit News Twice A Month To Place A Classified Ad Classified Ads Single Ad One Issue *Two Or More Issues 45 words or less 46-90 words 91- 135 words $35 $65 $95 $30/issue $55/issue $80/issue Over 135 words- add $30 for each additional45 word increment. * You must pre-pay to receive a discount for two or more issues. All ad repeats must be ordered at the time ofthe first placement and paid in advance by check. No discount for ads over 135 words. Cancellations and errors: We must be notified of printing errors within 10 days of publication. Compensation for errors will be only in the form of re-running the corrected ad, and w ill be made only for errors which materially affect ad content. Publication of an ad does not imply any endorsement or guarantee. We reserve the right to edit or reject any ad. Deadlines: For the 12/4 issue, the deadline is 11/15 at 1:00 p.m. For other deadlines, please contact the MNF office at 517/353-5038. ContactPerson: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Organization: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Address: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------City: --------------------- State: ----------------------------- Zip: -----------------------.....--Phone: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Attach ad copy. Enter total number of words, counting each character or group of characters both preceded & followed by a space as one word. Total # - - - - - - Number of weeks to place ad(s): --------weeks Payment: Payment required with ad copy. If you fax your ad, please mail payment with duplicate of faxed ad copy. Make checks payable to: Michigan Nonprofit Forum. Amount enclosed: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mail or fax ad copy to: Michigan Nonprofit Forum, 31 Kellogg Center, East Lansing, MI 48824-1022 517/355-3302 (Fax#) 517/353-5038 (Phone#) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_1995-Classified-Connection Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1995 MNF Classified Connection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1995 MNF Classified Connection. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49805 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bdc67978341b1ac30b7b0935a8ce8eb4.pdf 355860953123d29129e01894e17fad8c PDF Text Text Board of Trustees Richard Cole Chair Michael Tate Vice Chair Michigan Nonprofit Forum MEMORANDUM TO: MNF Board of Trustees Anne Rosewame Secretary FROM: Sr. Monica Kostielney, Chair MNF Nominating Committee Justin King Treasurer SUBJECT: Recommendations for Vacant At-Large Trustee Seats Helen Philpott Immediate Past Chair Russell Mawby Chair Emeritus N. Charles Anderson Thomas Bernthal Edward Blews Harry Bonner Betty Boone Rodney Brooks Aaron Cantrell Virgil Carr Robert Collier Charles Eisendrath Michelle Engter Carolyn Harvey Robert Ivory Steven Johns-Boehme Dorothy Johnson Gerard Keidel Sr. Monica Kostielney Mary Kramer John Lore Arend Lubbers Jane Marshall Ann Marston Dennis Marvin Ronald Means Judith Rapanos George Romney Kathryn Rossow David Seaman Diana Sieger Glenn Stevens Alan Stone Kathleen Straus Robert Thayer Melvin Vulgamore Mark Wilson David Egner Executive Director With Robert Collier's resignation from the MNF Board of Trustees and the untimely passing of George Romney, we have two at-large trustee seats open on the MNF Board. The by-laws stipulate that the board chair appoint trustees to fill the remainder of the terms of trustees leaving the board. We are seeking your recommendations for these vacancies. If you have an individual that you would like considered for the MNF at-large trustee seats, please complete and return the form below to the MNF offices. I recommend the following individual for the MNF Board of Trustees: Name: Title: Organization: Candidate qualifications: ref: s:\winword\commine\bdl\nominee.frm - ejs AN ALLIANCE TO PROMOTE GIVING, VOLUNTEERING AND A STRONG, EFFECTIVE NONPROFIT SECTOR IN MICHIGAN 31 Kellogg Center • East Lansing, MI 48824-1022 • Phone 517/353-5038 • Fax 517/355-3302 Working in partnership with Volunteer Centers of Michigan and Michigan Campus Compact � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our State of Generosity Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Description An account of the resource Collection contains the records of four Michigan nonprofit organizations: Council of Michigan Foundations, Michigan Nonprofit Association, Michigan Community Service Commission, and the Johnson Center for Philanthropy at GVSU. The documents are compiled by the Johnson Center for Philanthropy, and records document the history of the organizations from the 1960s to the 2010s. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1968-2014 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Council of Michigan Foundations Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Community Service Commission Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49401 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Council of Michigan Foundations; Michigan Nonprofit Association; Michigan Community Service Commission Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04 Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context JCPA-04_MNA_MNF_1995-Nominating-Committee-Memo Title A name given to the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1995 nominating committee memo Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum Description An account of the resource Michigan Nonprofit Forum 1995 nominating committee memo. Records are compiled in the Our State of Generosity collection by the Johnson Center, along with the files of the Michigan Nonprofit Association (MNA), the Michigan Community Service Commission (MSCS) and the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy. Subject The topic of the resource Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy Charities Philanthropy and Society Fundraising Records Michigan Nonprofit Association Michigan Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI, 49806 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/515">Our State of Generosity collection, JCPA-04</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1995