It does not mean that basic rules of doing business do not apply—especially the most basic; that at some point dollars in have to be equal or greater than dollars out on a sustainable basis.
I too was saddened to hear about the closing of JDub, an organization that forges connections to Judaism through the arts, media and culture. Afterall, I am into Jewish cultural renaissance just as much, or likely more, than the next person. And this article is not about JDub or about any one organization in particular. Rather, it is a response to Sarah Kass’s fear expressed in eJewishPhilanthropy that the closing of organizations like these due to financial constraints after 9 years of operations will inhibit the creativity of others to launch new ventures.
I disagree. I will throw out what is going to be a very unpopular opinion: there are too many new not for profit organizations, but there are not enough good ones.
Lately, it seems that in both the Jewish and secular world, if anyone has an idea of an audience they want to serve, their first thought is to create a new not for profit, rather than seeking to partner with an organization working with a similar audience or in a similar space. As a result, a duplicate organization is created. In the for profit world, competition can lead to lower prices, market efficiencies and consumer benefits. In the not for profit world, it can lead to a duplication of resources, donor confusion and diversion of money from those who need it to overhead.
The non-profit world is so crowded with startups, some without any operating sense or enough customers to either fund or accept its services, it feels like the Internet bubble of the late 90s. As in the late 90s, even savvy funds are having a hard time finding the strong organizations. Funds are getting diluted and the organizations that should survive, the ones that have a good model and serve a real audience, are getting lost in the noise.
Organizations—even those with the 501c3 designation—need to run with operational discipline. They have obligations to the communities they serve to fulfill their promises. They are taking hard earned money from donors and have to spend it wisely and effectively. Yes, not for profits need seed money, start-up capital and investment, but if after some period of time—and that time period could vary—they are not able to retain existing funders and attract new funders and partners to sustain operations and fuel growth, perhaps they have to start asking themselves some hard questions. Are they operating efficiently? Are they meeting a real need in the community?
At some point, we have to look around at the proliferation of not for profit organizations that are competing for the same dollars, the same staff and the same attention and say dayeinu.
I too was saddened to hear about the closing of JDub, an organization that forges connections to Judaism through the arts, media and culture. Afterall, I am into Jewish cultural renaissance just as much, or likely more, than the next person. And this article is not about JDub or about any one organization in particular. Rather, it is a response to Sarah Kass’s fear expressed in eJewishPhilanthropy that the closing of organizations like these due to financial constraints after 9 years of operations will inhibit the creativity of others to launch new ventures.
I disagree. I will throw out what is going to be a very unpopular opinion: there are too many new not for profit organizations, but there are not enough good ones.
Lately, it seems that in both the Jewish and secular world, if anyone has an idea of an audience they want to serve, their first thought is to create a new not for profit, rather than seeking to partner with an organization working with a similar audience or in a similar space. As a result, a duplicate organization is created. In the for profit world, competition can lead to lower prices, market efficiencies and consumer benefits. In the not for profit world, it can lead to a duplication of resources, donor confusion and diversion of money from those who need it to overhead.
The non-profit world is so crowded with startups, some without any operating sense or enough customers to either fund or accept its services, it feels like the Internet bubble of the late 90s. As in the late 90s, even savvy funds are having a hard time finding the strong organizations. Funds are getting diluted and the organizations that should survive, the ones that have a good model and serve a real audience, are getting lost in the noise.
Organizations—even those with the 501c3 designation—need to run with operational discipline. They have obligations to the communities they serve to fulfill their promises. They are taking hard earned money from donors and have to spend it wisely and effectively. Yes, not for profits need seed money, start-up capital and investment, but if after some period of time—and that time period could vary—they are not able to retain existing funders and attract new funders and partners to sustain operations and fuel growth, perhaps they have to start asking themselves some hard questions. Are they operating efficiently? Are they meeting a real need in the community?
At some point, we have to look around at the proliferation of not for profit organizations that are competing for the same dollars, the same staff and the same attention and say dayeinu.
No comments:
Post a Comment